Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

GUEST,Porn 07 Aug 06 - 06:51 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 05:04 AM
gnu 09 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM
Joe Offer 09 Aug 06 - 05:55 AM
Big Mick 09 Aug 06 - 09:12 AM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 10:49 AM
number 6 09 Aug 06 - 10:56 AM
GUEST,jOhn 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM
GUEST 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM
Bill D 09 Aug 06 - 11:36 AM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 11:43 AM
GUEST,jOhn 09 Aug 06 - 11:50 AM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 11:56 AM
Georgiansilver 09 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 12:17 PM
GUEST,Art Thieme 09 Aug 06 - 12:21 PM
katlaughing 09 Aug 06 - 12:37 PM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM
GUEST,jOhn 09 Aug 06 - 12:47 PM
Lepus Rex 09 Aug 06 - 12:50 PM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 12:55 PM
Lepus Rex 09 Aug 06 - 01:14 PM
Georgiansilver 09 Aug 06 - 01:18 PM
artbrooks 09 Aug 06 - 01:32 PM
Lepus Rex 09 Aug 06 - 01:38 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 02:16 PM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 02:23 PM
GUEST 09 Aug 06 - 02:57 PM
Big Mick 09 Aug 06 - 05:33 PM
Clinton Hammond 09 Aug 06 - 05:36 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 06:49 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 07:03 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 07:10 PM
katlaughing 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM
Peace 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM
Bert 09 Aug 06 - 07:42 PM
GUEST 09 Aug 06 - 07:56 PM
John O'L 09 Aug 06 - 08:11 PM
The Shambles 09 Aug 06 - 08:22 PM
GUEST,Jon 09 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 02:59 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 04:44 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 05:31 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 05:40 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 06:24 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 06:27 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 06:37 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 06:42 AM
GUEST,Grab 10 Aug 06 - 08:01 AM
jacqui.c 10 Aug 06 - 08:21 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 08:53 AM
MMario 10 Aug 06 - 09:00 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 09:13 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 09:18 AM
Dave the Gnome 10 Aug 06 - 09:27 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 09:44 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 09:54 AM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 10:08 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 10:18 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 10:22 AM
GUEST,Grab 10 Aug 06 - 10:25 AM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM
Ebbie 10 Aug 06 - 11:34 AM
Bill D 10 Aug 06 - 11:35 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 11:42 AM
jeffp 10 Aug 06 - 11:44 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 11:45 AM
jeffp 10 Aug 06 - 11:49 AM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 11:49 AM
Wesley S 10 Aug 06 - 11:50 AM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 12:06 PM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 12:11 PM
jeffp 10 Aug 06 - 12:32 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 12:51 PM
Bill D 10 Aug 06 - 12:59 PM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 01:00 PM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 01:03 PM
jeffp 10 Aug 06 - 01:05 PM
GUEST,Grab 10 Aug 06 - 01:27 PM
Bill D 10 Aug 06 - 01:31 PM
Joe Offer 10 Aug 06 - 01:49 PM
The Shambles 10 Aug 06 - 02:41 PM
Dave the Gnome 10 Aug 06 - 02:50 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Aug 06 - 02:55 PM
Clinton Hammond 10 Aug 06 - 03:09 PM
The Shambles 11 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM
Sttaw Legend 11 Aug 06 - 10:41 AM
The Shambles 11 Aug 06 - 11:02 AM
Dave the Gnome 11 Aug 06 - 11:21 AM
GUEST 11 Aug 06 - 11:29 AM
GUEST,Cartoon Porn 11 Aug 06 - 01:34 PM
The Shambles 11 Aug 06 - 02:04 PM
GUEST,Jon 11 Aug 06 - 02:42 PM
Clinton Hammond 11 Aug 06 - 03:24 PM
The Shambles 11 Aug 06 - 06:02 PM
Clinton Hammond 11 Aug 06 - 06:13 PM
GUEST,Jon 11 Aug 06 - 06:24 PM
Dave the Gnome 11 Aug 06 - 06:58 PM
skipy 11 Aug 06 - 07:06 PM
GUEST,FIELDVOLE 11 Aug 06 - 08:13 PM
Bill D 11 Aug 06 - 08:21 PM
Clinton Hammond 11 Aug 06 - 08:33 PM
GUEST,Jon 11 Aug 06 - 08:35 PM
Joe Offer 11 Aug 06 - 08:55 PM
GUEST,FIELDVOLE 11 Aug 06 - 08:59 PM
Joe Offer 11 Aug 06 - 09:07 PM
GUEST,fieldvole 11 Aug 06 - 09:10 PM
GUEST,Fieldvole 11 Aug 06 - 09:15 PM
GUEST,Jon 11 Aug 06 - 09:20 PM
Joe Offer 11 Aug 06 - 09:29 PM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 09:29 AM
GUEST,Jon 12 Aug 06 - 09:45 AM
Alba 12 Aug 06 - 09:53 AM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 10:00 AM
GUEST,Jon 12 Aug 06 - 10:08 AM
GUEST,Jon 12 Aug 06 - 10:11 AM
jacqui.c 12 Aug 06 - 11:01 AM
Big Al Whittle 12 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 11:12 AM
GUEST,Jon 12 Aug 06 - 11:21 AM
Sorcha 12 Aug 06 - 11:48 AM
Clinton Hammond 12 Aug 06 - 12:35 PM
Ebbie 12 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM
GUEST,Fieldvole 12 Aug 06 - 01:54 PM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM
Clinton Hammond 12 Aug 06 - 02:19 PM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM
Clinton Hammond 12 Aug 06 - 02:25 PM
The Shambles 12 Aug 06 - 02:43 PM
GUEST 12 Aug 06 - 02:57 PM
Joe Offer 12 Aug 06 - 03:13 PM
Peace 12 Aug 06 - 06:32 PM
GUEST,depressed 12 Aug 06 - 11:32 PM
GUEST 12 Aug 06 - 11:54 PM
Peace 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM
Clinton Hammond 13 Aug 06 - 12:02 AM
GUEST,depressed 13 Aug 06 - 12:16 AM
GUEST,depred 13 Aug 06 - 12:17 AM
GUEST,depressed 13 Aug 06 - 12:19 AM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 02:43 AM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 02:54 AM
Joe Offer 13 Aug 06 - 03:14 AM
GUEST,Jon 13 Aug 06 - 05:25 AM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 06:30 AM
GUEST 13 Aug 06 - 07:01 AM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 07:04 AM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 12:59 PM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM
Joe Offer 13 Aug 06 - 02:00 PM
The Shambles 13 Aug 06 - 03:01 PM
Clinton Hammond 13 Aug 06 - 03:12 PM
The Shambles 14 Aug 06 - 01:31 AM
Joe Offer 14 Aug 06 - 01:52 AM
Clinton Hammond 14 Aug 06 - 12:38 PM
Raedwulf 14 Aug 06 - 04:14 PM
Clinton Hammond 14 Aug 06 - 04:17 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 02:41 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Aug 06 - 02:45 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 02:50 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Aug 06 - 02:53 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 03:02 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Aug 06 - 03:11 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 03:16 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Aug 06 - 03:20 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 05:25 PM
GUEST 16 Aug 06 - 06:16 PM
jeffp 16 Aug 06 - 06:23 PM
Peace 16 Aug 06 - 08:32 PM
jeffp 16 Aug 06 - 10:15 PM
Peace 16 Aug 06 - 10:18 PM
jeffp 16 Aug 06 - 10:22 PM
Peace 16 Aug 06 - 10:24 PM
jeffp 16 Aug 06 - 10:39 PM
The Shambles 17 Aug 06 - 11:58 AM
MMario 17 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM
Clinton Hammond 17 Aug 06 - 12:11 PM
The Shambles 17 Aug 06 - 12:39 PM
Clinton Hammond 17 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM
The Shambles 17 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM
Clinton Hammond 17 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM
The Shambles 18 Aug 06 - 12:49 PM
MMario 18 Aug 06 - 12:57 PM
The Shambles 18 Aug 06 - 01:07 PM
Clinton Hammond 18 Aug 06 - 01:19 PM
Ebbie 18 Aug 06 - 01:22 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Aug 06 - 01:23 PM
MMario 18 Aug 06 - 01:27 PM
Joe Offer 18 Aug 06 - 01:35 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM
The Shambles 18 Aug 06 - 01:53 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Aug 06 - 02:02 PM
Joe Offer 18 Aug 06 - 02:17 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM
catspaw49 18 Aug 06 - 02:24 PM
MMario 18 Aug 06 - 02:27 PM
Joe Offer 18 Aug 06 - 04:59 PM
Wesley S 18 Aug 06 - 05:13 PM
Bill D 18 Aug 06 - 06:46 PM
Peace 18 Aug 06 - 11:22 PM
The Shambles 19 Aug 06 - 06:40 AM
The Shambles 19 Aug 06 - 06:47 AM
John MacKenzie 19 Aug 06 - 06:54 AM
GUEST 19 Aug 06 - 06:55 AM
The Shambles 19 Aug 06 - 03:16 PM
Peace 19 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM
Big Mick 19 Aug 06 - 10:30 PM
Sorcha 19 Aug 06 - 10:50 PM
number 6 19 Aug 06 - 10:55 PM
Peace 19 Aug 06 - 10:57 PM
Bill D 19 Aug 06 - 11:26 PM
Peace 19 Aug 06 - 11:28 PM
John MacKenzie 20 Aug 06 - 05:59 AM
Dave the Gnome 20 Aug 06 - 06:11 AM
John MacKenzie 20 Aug 06 - 06:25 AM
The Shambles 20 Aug 06 - 07:53 PM
Bill D 20 Aug 06 - 07:59 PM
Peace 20 Aug 06 - 08:09 PM
Peace 20 Aug 06 - 08:30 PM
JennyO 20 Aug 06 - 11:30 PM
Bill D 20 Aug 06 - 11:31 PM
Peace 20 Aug 06 - 11:37 PM
catspaw49 21 Aug 06 - 01:16 AM
John MacKenzie 21 Aug 06 - 05:25 AM
GUEST,Bewildered Dingo 21 Aug 06 - 10:52 AM
The Shambles 22 Aug 06 - 06:10 AM
The Shambles 23 Aug 06 - 05:05 PM
John MacKenzie 23 Aug 06 - 05:25 PM
Peace 23 Aug 06 - 06:15 PM
The Shambles 23 Aug 06 - 06:16 PM
Sorcha 23 Aug 06 - 06:20 PM
GUEST 23 Aug 06 - 07:49 PM
GUEST 23 Aug 06 - 08:10 PM
John O'L 23 Aug 06 - 10:02 PM
The Shambles 24 Aug 06 - 04:29 AM
The Shambles 25 Aug 06 - 05:07 AM
John MacKenzie 25 Aug 06 - 05:12 AM
The Shambles 25 Aug 06 - 11:47 AM
manitas_at_work 25 Aug 06 - 12:09 PM
Wolfgang 25 Aug 06 - 12:21 PM
John MacKenzie 25 Aug 06 - 12:49 PM
catspaw49 25 Aug 06 - 12:53 PM
GUEST 25 Aug 06 - 01:44 PM
John MacKenzie 25 Aug 06 - 01:54 PM
Bill D 25 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM
John MacKenzie 25 Aug 06 - 02:48 PM
Ebbie 25 Aug 06 - 02:52 PM
Bill D 25 Aug 06 - 03:30 PM
Bill D 25 Aug 06 - 03:31 PM
John MacKenzie 25 Aug 06 - 03:41 PM
The Shambles 25 Aug 06 - 09:00 PM
GUEST,Jon 25 Aug 06 - 09:26 PM
The Shambles 26 Aug 06 - 05:22 AM
catspaw49 26 Aug 06 - 05:33 AM
GUEST,Jon 26 Aug 06 - 06:52 AM
The Shambles 27 Aug 06 - 07:32 AM
John MacKenzie 27 Aug 06 - 07:57 AM
GUEST 27 Aug 06 - 08:09 AM
Jeri 27 Aug 06 - 08:37 AM
John MacKenzie 27 Aug 06 - 09:51 AM
Big Mick 27 Aug 06 - 09:55 AM
GUEST 27 Aug 06 - 10:47 AM
Big Mick 27 Aug 06 - 10:56 AM
John MacKenzie 27 Aug 06 - 10:58 AM
The Shambles 28 Aug 06 - 06:58 AM
The Shambles 29 Aug 06 - 08:04 AM
The Shambles 30 Aug 06 - 02:29 AM
The Shambles 30 Aug 06 - 01:20 PM
The Shambles 31 Aug 06 - 12:36 PM
The Shambles 01 Sep 06 - 09:02 PM
The Shambles 03 Sep 06 - 10:04 AM
The Shambles 04 Sep 06 - 02:14 AM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 05:23 AM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 02:36 PM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 06:28 PM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 06:58 PM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 07:17 PM
The Shambles 05 Sep 06 - 07:26 PM
The Shambles 06 Sep 06 - 05:53 AM
Stilly River Sage 06 Sep 06 - 02:55 PM
Jeri 06 Sep 06 - 03:24 PM
Joe Offer 06 Sep 06 - 05:43 PM
Jeri 06 Sep 06 - 06:01 PM
Peace 06 Sep 06 - 06:35 PM
Peace 06 Sep 06 - 06:58 PM
artbrooks 06 Sep 06 - 09:20 PM
Peace 06 Sep 06 - 09:26 PM
Peace 06 Sep 06 - 09:35 PM
GUEST 06 Sep 06 - 09:43 PM
Bill D 06 Sep 06 - 09:53 PM
artbrooks 06 Sep 06 - 10:00 PM
bobad 06 Sep 06 - 10:25 PM
JennyO 06 Sep 06 - 10:37 PM
Janie 06 Sep 06 - 11:38 PM
Stilly River Sage 07 Sep 06 - 01:17 AM
Little Hawk 07 Sep 06 - 01:21 AM
Joe Offer 07 Sep 06 - 02:20 AM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 02:33 AM
Joe Offer 07 Sep 06 - 02:49 AM
John MacKenzie 07 Sep 06 - 04:17 AM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 05:15 AM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 05:25 AM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 05:52 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 07 Sep 06 - 06:52 AM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 12:26 PM
Little Hawk 07 Sep 06 - 12:52 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 01:21 PM
The Shambles 07 Sep 06 - 01:44 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Sep 06 - 01:56 PM
Ebbie 07 Sep 06 - 02:45 PM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 08:14 AM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 08:35 AM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 08:50 AM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 09:39 AM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 10:32 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 08 Sep 06 - 10:44 AM
GUEST 08 Sep 06 - 10:59 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 08 Sep 06 - 11:05 AM
GUEST 08 Sep 06 - 11:09 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 08 Sep 06 - 11:17 AM
GUEST 08 Sep 06 - 11:23 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 08 Sep 06 - 11:30 AM
GUEST 08 Sep 06 - 11:50 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 08 Sep 06 - 11:57 AM
Nick 08 Sep 06 - 12:00 PM
Ebbie 08 Sep 06 - 12:07 PM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 12:17 PM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 12:33 PM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 12:40 PM
The Shambles 08 Sep 06 - 12:45 PM
The Shambles 09 Sep 06 - 05:07 AM
GUEST 09 Sep 06 - 05:37 AM
The Shambles 10 Sep 06 - 03:03 AM
GUEST,Zen Buddhist 10 Sep 06 - 09:11 AM
The Shambles 10 Sep 06 - 01:19 PM
Ebbie 10 Sep 06 - 02:23 PM
The Shambles 11 Sep 06 - 06:07 AM
The Shambles 11 Sep 06 - 11:02 AM
The Shambles 12 Sep 06 - 02:30 AM
GUEST 12 Sep 06 - 06:20 PM
The Shambles 13 Sep 06 - 01:06 PM
GUEST 13 Sep 06 - 09:08 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Sep 06 - 09:35 PM
GUEST,Unusual Person 14 Sep 06 - 04:24 PM
The Shambles 15 Sep 06 - 10:20 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 10:39 AM
The Shambles 15 Sep 06 - 12:38 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM
GUEST 15 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 01:02 PM
The Shambles 15 Sep 06 - 02:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 02:11 PM
GUEST 15 Sep 06 - 02:28 PM
The Shambles 15 Sep 06 - 02:34 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 02:39 PM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 15 Sep 06 - 02:48 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 02:53 PM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 15 Sep 06 - 03:02 PM
MMario 15 Sep 06 - 03:05 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 03:06 PM
GUEST 15 Sep 06 - 03:15 PM
Wolfgang 15 Sep 06 - 04:25 PM
artbrooks 15 Sep 06 - 04:39 PM
Big Mick 15 Sep 06 - 04:40 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Sep 06 - 04:41 PM
GUEST,KB 15 Sep 06 - 04:56 PM
The Shambles 15 Sep 06 - 08:38 PM
The Shambles 17 Sep 06 - 08:25 AM
GUEST 17 Sep 06 - 08:56 AM
The Shambles 17 Sep 06 - 06:35 PM
GUEST 17 Sep 06 - 06:51 PM
The Shambles 17 Sep 06 - 06:57 PM
curmudgeon 17 Sep 06 - 07:52 PM
Big Mick 17 Sep 06 - 08:10 PM
GUEST 17 Sep 06 - 09:41 PM
The Shambles 18 Sep 06 - 02:33 AM
GUEST,Ennui 18 Sep 06 - 03:23 AM
The Shambles 18 Sep 06 - 05:07 AM
GUEST,Ennui 18 Sep 06 - 06:49 AM
GUEST,Ennui 8 18 Sep 06 - 07:53 AM
Grab 18 Sep 06 - 08:03 AM
The Shambles 18 Sep 06 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 18 Sep 06 - 01:46 PM
GUEST 18 Sep 06 - 03:26 PM
GUEST 18 Sep 06 - 06:40 PM
GUEST 18 Sep 06 - 06:41 PM
GUEST 18 Sep 06 - 07:59 PM
The Shambles 18 Sep 06 - 08:29 PM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 19 Sep 06 - 05:22 AM
Grab 19 Sep 06 - 08:28 AM
The Shambles 19 Sep 06 - 11:29 AM
Ebbie 19 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM
GUEST 19 Sep 06 - 01:11 PM
The Shambles 19 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM
Ebbie 19 Sep 06 - 01:58 PM
GUEST 19 Sep 06 - 02:41 PM
John MacKenzie 19 Sep 06 - 02:46 PM
GUEST 19 Sep 06 - 02:52 PM
John MacKenzie 19 Sep 06 - 03:05 PM
GUEST 19 Sep 06 - 03:07 PM
Bill D 19 Sep 06 - 06:17 PM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 02:13 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 02:31 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 04:07 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 10:12 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 10:18 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 11:10 AM
Manitas_at_home 20 Sep 06 - 11:15 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 11:26 AM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM
GUEST 20 Sep 06 - 01:29 PM
GUEST 20 Sep 06 - 01:51 PM
GUEST 20 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 03:00 PM
The Shambles 20 Sep 06 - 03:08 PM
The Shambles 21 Sep 06 - 02:28 AM
The Shambles 21 Sep 06 - 10:18 AM
The Shambles 21 Sep 06 - 12:38 PM
The Shambles 21 Sep 06 - 02:24 PM
Clinton Hammond 21 Sep 06 - 02:34 PM
GUEST 21 Sep 06 - 04:53 PM
GUEST 21 Sep 06 - 06:47 PM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 22 Sep 06 - 04:32 AM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 04:39 AM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 06:29 AM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 07:28 AM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 07:51 AM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 10:05 AM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 10:37 AM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 12:12 PM
Blowzabella 22 Sep 06 - 02:21 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 02:23 PM
Blowzabella 22 Sep 06 - 02:29 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Sep 06 - 02:33 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 02:40 PM
Pseudolus 22 Sep 06 - 02:54 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 03:02 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Sep 06 - 03:10 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 03:14 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 03:15 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Sep 06 - 03:18 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 03:21 PM
John MacKenzie 22 Sep 06 - 03:32 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 03:33 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Sep 06 - 03:38 PM
Blowzabella 22 Sep 06 - 03:41 PM
Big Mick 22 Sep 06 - 03:43 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 03:57 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 04:00 PM
Big Mick 22 Sep 06 - 04:14 PM
Blowzabella 22 Sep 06 - 04:24 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 04:38 PM
Blowzabella 22 Sep 06 - 04:42 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 05:10 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 05:11 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 06:53 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 07:20 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 07:25 PM
The Shambles 22 Sep 06 - 07:37 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 08:07 PM
GUEST 22 Sep 06 - 08:22 PM
The Shambles 23 Sep 06 - 03:05 AM
The Shambles 23 Sep 06 - 04:51 AM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 23 Sep 06 - 05:28 AM
The Shambles 23 Sep 06 - 06:18 AM
GUEST 23 Sep 06 - 06:21 AM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 23 Sep 06 - 06:23 AM
GUEST 23 Sep 06 - 07:53 AM
GUEST 23 Sep 06 - 04:52 PM
The Shambles 23 Sep 06 - 07:45 PM
GUEST 24 Sep 06 - 04:14 PM
Blowzabella 24 Sep 06 - 08:27 PM
The Shambles 24 Sep 06 - 08:51 PM
The Shambles 25 Sep 06 - 01:12 PM
gnu 25 Sep 06 - 01:29 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 03:57 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 04:05 PM
number 6 25 Sep 06 - 04:08 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 04:36 PM
number 6 25 Sep 06 - 04:44 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 04:45 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 04:50 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 04:50 PM
number 6 25 Sep 06 - 05:01 PM
The Shambles 25 Sep 06 - 05:27 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 06 - 05:33 PM
GUEST,Joe Offer at the Women's Center 25 Sep 06 - 05:33 PM
GUEST,Joe Offer (at the Women's Center) 25 Sep 06 - 05:35 PM
The Shambles 25 Sep 06 - 05:54 PM
Big Mick 25 Sep 06 - 07:12 PM
catspaw49 25 Sep 06 - 11:20 PM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 05:55 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 06:12 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 06:37 AM
Wolfgang 26 Sep 06 - 07:00 AM
GUEST,jOhn 26 Sep 06 - 07:04 AM
GUEST 26 Sep 06 - 07:14 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 08:04 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 08:19 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 08:53 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 09:31 AM
GUEST 26 Sep 06 - 09:41 AM
GUEST 26 Sep 06 - 10:59 AM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 01:06 PM
The Shambles 26 Sep 06 - 01:09 PM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 26 Sep 06 - 01:47 PM
The Shambles 27 Sep 06 - 06:27 PM
The Shambles 28 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM
MMario 28 Sep 06 - 01:11 PM
The Shambles 28 Sep 06 - 06:49 PM
skipy 28 Sep 06 - 07:05 PM
The Shambles 28 Sep 06 - 07:25 PM
catspaw49 28 Sep 06 - 07:47 PM
The Shambles 28 Sep 06 - 07:49 PM
catspaw49 28 Sep 06 - 07:54 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 08:45 AM
manitas_at_work 29 Sep 06 - 08:50 AM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 09:12 AM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 29 Sep 06 - 09:33 AM
catspaw49 29 Sep 06 - 10:36 AM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 12:38 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Sep 06 - 12:48 PM
catspaw49 29 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 12:57 PM
catspaw49 29 Sep 06 - 01:04 PM
Bill D 29 Sep 06 - 01:11 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Sep 06 - 01:15 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 01:26 PM
GUEST,Jon 29 Sep 06 - 01:29 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 01:38 PM
Bill D 29 Sep 06 - 01:44 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 01:48 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 01:56 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 02:08 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 02:08 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 02:11 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 02:28 PM
Bill D 29 Sep 06 - 02:30 PM
MMario 29 Sep 06 - 02:39 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 02:46 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 02:55 PM
Wolfgang 29 Sep 06 - 03:10 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 03:17 PM
Ebbie 29 Sep 06 - 03:41 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 04:19 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 05:00 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 05:08 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 05:15 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 05:24 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 05:29 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 05:31 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 05:33 PM
Big Mick 29 Sep 06 - 05:34 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 05:35 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 05:42 PM
Peace 29 Sep 06 - 05:49 PM
Peace 29 Sep 06 - 05:51 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 05:58 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 06:03 PM
Peace 29 Sep 06 - 06:06 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 06:07 PM
Manitas_at_home 29 Sep 06 - 06:16 PM
Bill D 29 Sep 06 - 06:31 PM
Peace 29 Sep 06 - 06:50 PM
The Shambles 29 Sep 06 - 07:16 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 07:40 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 08:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 08:31 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 08:41 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 09:20 PM
Peace 29 Sep 06 - 09:29 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 09:33 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 09:37 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Sep 06 - 09:38 PM
jeffp 29 Sep 06 - 10:18 PM
GUEST 29 Sep 06 - 10:19 PM
The Shambles 30 Sep 06 - 07:34 AM
The Shambles 30 Sep 06 - 12:09 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 30 Sep 06 - 03:20 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Sep 06 - 03:25 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 30 Sep 06 - 03:54 PM
The Shambles 30 Sep 06 - 04:07 PM
GUEST,Ennui 1st 30 Sep 06 - 04:57 PM
Little Hawk 30 Sep 06 - 05:34 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 30 Sep 06 - 05:52 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 30 Sep 06 - 05:52 PM
gnu 30 Sep 06 - 06:09 PM
Grab 30 Sep 06 - 07:27 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Sep 06 - 07:44 PM
GUEST 30 Sep 06 - 07:57 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 30 Sep 06 - 08:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Sep 06 - 08:04 PM
GUEST 30 Sep 06 - 08:25 PM
Bill D 30 Sep 06 - 10:40 PM
GUEST 30 Sep 06 - 10:45 PM
GUEST 30 Sep 06 - 10:46 PM
Bill D 30 Sep 06 - 11:41 PM
Little Hawk 30 Sep 06 - 11:53 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 12:09 AM
JennyO 01 Oct 06 - 05:49 AM
The Shambles 01 Oct 06 - 07:39 AM
The Shambles 01 Oct 06 - 08:19 AM
catspaw49 01 Oct 06 - 09:19 AM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 11:37 AM
Bill D 01 Oct 06 - 12:14 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 01 Oct 06 - 01:35 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 01:59 PM
Little Hawk 01 Oct 06 - 02:02 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 02:38 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 01 Oct 06 - 03:16 PM
Wolfgang 01 Oct 06 - 03:19 PM
The Shambles 01 Oct 06 - 03:28 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 01 Oct 06 - 03:33 PM
GUEST,Jon 01 Oct 06 - 03:36 PM
Bill D 01 Oct 06 - 03:48 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 04:08 PM
The Shambles 01 Oct 06 - 04:15 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 04:24 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 01 Oct 06 - 04:29 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 04:37 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 04:42 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 04:48 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 01 Oct 06 - 04:57 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 05:05 PM
Bill D 01 Oct 06 - 05:32 PM
Jeri 01 Oct 06 - 05:43 PM
Little Hawk 01 Oct 06 - 05:49 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 05:53 PM
Emma B 01 Oct 06 - 05:55 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:01 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:04 PM
Little Hawk 01 Oct 06 - 06:04 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:07 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:09 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:11 PM
Emma B 01 Oct 06 - 06:11 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:13 PM
Emma B 01 Oct 06 - 06:14 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:16 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:21 PM
John MacKenzie 01 Oct 06 - 06:24 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:26 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:31 PM
John MacKenzie 01 Oct 06 - 06:31 PM
Emma B 01 Oct 06 - 06:32 PM
Emma B 01 Oct 06 - 06:33 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:34 PM
Azizi 01 Oct 06 - 06:50 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 06:54 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 07:26 PM
GUEST 01 Oct 06 - 07:28 PM
jeffp 01 Oct 06 - 09:45 PM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 02:09 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 02:26 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 05:14 AM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 06:08 AM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 06:25 AM
John MacKenzie 02 Oct 06 - 06:26 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 09:17 AM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 10:01 AM
bobad 02 Oct 06 - 10:06 AM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 10:21 AM
bobad 02 Oct 06 - 10:26 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 10:33 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 11:14 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 11:38 AM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 11:40 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 11:54 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 11:59 AM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 12:14 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 12:17 PM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 12:53 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 01:15 PM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 01:42 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 01:49 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 02:04 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 02:19 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 02:34 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 02:39 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 02:42 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 02:47 PM
MMario 02 Oct 06 - 02:49 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 02:56 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 02:59 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 03:01 PM
GUEST,Jon 02 Oct 06 - 03:04 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 04:31 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 04:36 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 04:37 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 04:46 PM
Bill D 02 Oct 06 - 04:49 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 04:49 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 04:51 PM
GUEST,perty host 02 Oct 06 - 06:42 PM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 06:43 PM
The Shambles 02 Oct 06 - 07:18 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 08:01 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 08:10 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 08:17 PM
GUEST,party host 02 Oct 06 - 08:17 PM
GUEST,party host 02 Oct 06 - 08:26 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 08:30 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 08:33 PM
wysiwyg 02 Oct 06 - 10:41 PM
Little Hawk 02 Oct 06 - 10:47 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 10:51 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 02 Oct 06 - 10:57 PM
GUEST 02 Oct 06 - 11:08 PM
Little Hawk 02 Oct 06 - 11:14 PM
The Shambles 03 Oct 06 - 02:24 AM
catspaw49 03 Oct 06 - 04:33 AM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 04:49 AM
The Shambles 03 Oct 06 - 05:20 AM
GUEST,Another voice in the wilderness. 03 Oct 06 - 06:26 AM
skipy 03 Oct 06 - 06:35 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 09:34 AM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 10:17 AM
John MacKenzie 03 Oct 06 - 11:29 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 11:32 AM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 11:33 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 11:39 AM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 11:54 AM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 12:33 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 01:26 PM
Wolfgang 03 Oct 06 - 01:30 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 01:55 PM
The Shambles 03 Oct 06 - 01:56 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 01:58 PM
GUEST,Shambolic 03 Oct 06 - 02:00 PM
GUEST,party host 03 Oct 06 - 02:10 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 02:27 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 02:48 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 03:07 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 03:23 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 03:30 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 03:49 PM
jacqui.c 03 Oct 06 - 05:01 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 05:09 PM
GUEST 03 Oct 06 - 05:09 PM
GUEST,Jon 03 Oct 06 - 05:11 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 05:20 PM
bobad 03 Oct 06 - 05:29 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 05:32 PM
GUEST,party host 03 Oct 06 - 07:25 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 07:43 PM
GUEST,party host 03 Oct 06 - 08:19 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 03 Oct 06 - 09:41 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 02:34 AM
GUEST,party host 04 Oct 06 - 03:34 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 04:01 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 05:07 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 05:25 AM
GUEST,alternative party host 04 Oct 06 - 05:56 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 05:59 AM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 06:44 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 06:50 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 07:13 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 07:46 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 08:13 AM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 08:17 AM
MMario 04 Oct 06 - 08:18 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 08:32 AM
GUEST,party host 04 Oct 06 - 09:08 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 09:16 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 09:30 AM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 09:30 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 09:39 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 09:43 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 09:47 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 09:54 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 09:58 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 10:03 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 10:06 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 10:08 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 10:10 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 10:15 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 10:16 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 10:26 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 10:34 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 10:36 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 11:13 AM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 11:22 AM
MMario 04 Oct 06 - 11:28 AM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 11:45 AM
MMario 04 Oct 06 - 11:48 AM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 12:11 PM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM
MMario 04 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 12:24 PM
John MacKenzie 04 Oct 06 - 12:27 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 12:35 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 12:52 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 02:53 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 03:03 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 03:32 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 03:41 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 03:42 PM
The Shambles 04 Oct 06 - 03:49 PM
MMario 04 Oct 06 - 03:53 PM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 04 Oct 06 - 04:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 06 - 04:02 PM
GUEST 04 Oct 06 - 05:25 PM
Wolfgang 04 Oct 06 - 05:59 PM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 02:29 AM
John MacKenzie 05 Oct 06 - 03:54 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 04:36 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 05:10 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 05:40 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 05:57 AM
John MacKenzie 05 Oct 06 - 06:11 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 06:38 AM
Wolfgang 05 Oct 06 - 10:10 AM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 11:58 AM
Wolfgang 05 Oct 06 - 12:48 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Oct 06 - 12:55 PM
The Shambles 05 Oct 06 - 06:41 PM
The Shambles 06 Oct 06 - 08:09 AM
Wolfgang 06 Oct 06 - 08:15 AM
The Shambles 06 Oct 06 - 08:25 AM
John MacKenzie 06 Oct 06 - 08:36 AM
The Shambles 06 Oct 06 - 08:39 AM
John MacKenzie 06 Oct 06 - 09:23 AM
The Shambles 06 Oct 06 - 09:45 AM
John MacKenzie 06 Oct 06 - 09:55 AM
The Shambles 06 Oct 06 - 07:37 PM
GUEST,Wesley S 06 Oct 06 - 07:51 PM
catspaw49 06 Oct 06 - 09:10 PM
GUEST,Jerry Craymore 06 Oct 06 - 09:18 PM
Peace 06 Oct 06 - 10:00 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 02:51 AM
GUEST 07 Oct 06 - 12:23 PM
John MacKenzie 07 Oct 06 - 12:45 PM
Little Hawk 07 Oct 06 - 01:48 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 03:54 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 04:22 PM
Little Hawk 07 Oct 06 - 04:47 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 05:53 PM
GUEST 07 Oct 06 - 06:54 PM
Ebbie 07 Oct 06 - 08:29 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 08:43 PM
The Shambles 07 Oct 06 - 08:51 PM
GUEST 07 Oct 06 - 09:39 PM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 03:57 AM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 06:13 AM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 06:30 AM
GUEST,Partridge 08 Oct 06 - 06:57 AM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 09:02 AM
Ebbie 08 Oct 06 - 01:01 PM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 01:24 PM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 08 Oct 06 - 01:49 PM
GUEST,Coerbeill 08 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM
Ebbie 08 Oct 06 - 02:54 PM
GUEST 08 Oct 06 - 03:12 PM
GUEST 08 Oct 06 - 03:20 PM
Bill D 08 Oct 06 - 03:25 PM
Big Mick 08 Oct 06 - 03:52 PM
The Shambles 08 Oct 06 - 04:03 PM
GUEST 08 Oct 06 - 04:09 PM
GUEST 08 Oct 06 - 08:08 PM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 02:27 AM
John MacKenzie 09 Oct 06 - 04:06 AM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 04:23 AM
John MacKenzie 09 Oct 06 - 05:14 AM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 05:48 AM
John MacKenzie 09 Oct 06 - 06:10 AM
Partridge 09 Oct 06 - 08:48 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 09 Oct 06 - 09:16 AM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 09:32 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 09 Oct 06 - 09:46 AM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 11:16 AM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 12:07 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 09 Oct 06 - 12:25 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 01:34 PM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 01:47 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM
Ebbie 09 Oct 06 - 02:08 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 09 Oct 06 - 02:19 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 03:03 PM
Peace 09 Oct 06 - 03:43 PM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 03:52 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 09 Oct 06 - 04:03 PM
GUEST,Wolfy Dan 09 Oct 06 - 04:05 PM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 04:40 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 09 Oct 06 - 04:43 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 04:46 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 09 Oct 06 - 05:07 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 05:17 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 09 Oct 06 - 05:25 PM
John MacKenzie 09 Oct 06 - 05:47 PM
Bill D 09 Oct 06 - 05:50 PM
GUEST 09 Oct 06 - 05:57 PM
bobad 09 Oct 06 - 06:05 PM
The Shambles 09 Oct 06 - 07:32 PM
The Shambles 10 Oct 06 - 04:45 AM
The Shambles 10 Oct 06 - 05:05 AM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 05:45 AM
GUEST 10 Oct 06 - 05:57 AM
The Shambles 10 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM
GUEST 10 Oct 06 - 12:50 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 10 Oct 06 - 01:15 PM
GUEST 10 Oct 06 - 01:33 PM
Wesley S 10 Oct 06 - 01:48 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 01:49 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 10 Oct 06 - 01:53 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 02:03 PM
GUEST 10 Oct 06 - 03:17 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 10 Oct 06 - 03:38 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 04:08 PM
The Shambles 10 Oct 06 - 05:00 PM
skipy 10 Oct 06 - 06:06 PM
Azizi 10 Oct 06 - 06:14 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 06:18 PM
Azizi 10 Oct 06 - 06:24 PM
GUEST,Jon 10 Oct 06 - 06:35 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 10 Oct 06 - 10:07 PM
GUEST 10 Oct 06 - 10:21 PM
GUEST 11 Oct 06 - 04:04 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 05:25 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 05:27 AM
manitas_at_work 11 Oct 06 - 05:31 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 05:48 AM
GUEST 11 Oct 06 - 06:09 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 07:58 AM
GUEST 11 Oct 06 - 08:06 AM
Wolfgang 11 Oct 06 - 08:24 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 09:15 AM
The Shambles 11 Oct 06 - 08:24 PM
GUEST 11 Oct 06 - 08:28 PM
GUEST 11 Oct 06 - 08:29 PM
Ebbie 11 Oct 06 - 11:22 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 02:44 AM
Blowzabella 12 Oct 06 - 03:18 AM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 04:28 AM
GUEST,He Who Shall Not be Named 12 Oct 06 - 10:36 AM
MMario 12 Oct 06 - 10:42 AM
Little Hawk 12 Oct 06 - 11:13 AM
GUEST 12 Oct 06 - 11:18 AM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 11:24 AM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 11:27 AM
manitas_at_work 12 Oct 06 - 11:39 AM
Little Hawk 12 Oct 06 - 11:52 AM
Wolfgang 12 Oct 06 - 11:53 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 12 Oct 06 - 11:55 AM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 12:02 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 12:04 PM
Clinton Hammond 12 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM
Wolfgang 12 Oct 06 - 12:17 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 12:19 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 12 Oct 06 - 12:32 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 12:33 PM
Clinton Hammond 12 Oct 06 - 12:58 PM
Bill D 12 Oct 06 - 01:03 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 01:18 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 01:21 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 12 Oct 06 - 01:33 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 02:01 PM
The Shambles 12 Oct 06 - 02:30 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 12 Oct 06 - 02:38 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 03:09 AM
Wolfgang 13 Oct 06 - 04:57 AM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 07:37 AM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 08:13 AM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 08:51 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 09:27 AM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 11:05 AM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 11:49 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 11:55 AM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 12:18 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 01:19 PM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 01:43 PM
jeffp 13 Oct 06 - 01:51 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 02:12 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 02:26 PM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 02:29 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 02:38 PM
Little Hawk 13 Oct 06 - 02:59 PM
Little Hawk 13 Oct 06 - 03:01 PM
Little Hawk 13 Oct 06 - 03:04 PM
Ebbie 13 Oct 06 - 03:21 PM
Little Hawk 13 Oct 06 - 03:25 PM
Wesley S 13 Oct 06 - 03:25 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 03:50 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 04:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 04:04 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 04:12 PM
MMario 13 Oct 06 - 04:21 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 13 Oct 06 - 04:23 PM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 04:42 PM
Big Mick 13 Oct 06 - 05:22 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 05:33 PM
Joe Offer 13 Oct 06 - 05:37 PM
Joe Offer 13 Oct 06 - 05:37 PM
Joe Offer 13 Oct 06 - 05:37 PM
Big Mick 13 Oct 06 - 05:41 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 05:42 PM
Joe Offer 13 Oct 06 - 05:47 PM
Wesley S 13 Oct 06 - 05:48 PM
jeffp 13 Oct 06 - 05:50 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 05:55 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 06:01 PM
Peace 13 Oct 06 - 06:04 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 06:16 PM
Big Mick 13 Oct 06 - 06:20 PM
The Shambles 13 Oct 06 - 06:23 PM
Big Mick 13 Oct 06 - 06:28 PM
Blowzabella 13 Oct 06 - 06:36 PM
GUEST 13 Oct 06 - 06:57 PM
Ebbie 13 Oct 06 - 09:04 PM
Big Mick 13 Oct 06 - 09:51 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 14 Oct 06 - 12:07 AM
JennyO 14 Oct 06 - 01:40 AM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 06:53 AM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 07:05 AM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 07:29 AM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 08:03 AM
Big Mick 14 Oct 06 - 09:19 AM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 10:38 AM
JennyO 14 Oct 06 - 11:10 AM
Big Mick 14 Oct 06 - 11:35 AM
GUEST 14 Oct 06 - 11:52 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 14 Oct 06 - 02:42 PM
GUEST 14 Oct 06 - 06:27 PM
Bill D 14 Oct 06 - 07:02 PM
GUEST 14 Oct 06 - 07:08 PM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 09:57 PM
The Shambles 14 Oct 06 - 10:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 14 Oct 06 - 10:30 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 12:09 AM
The Shambles 15 Oct 06 - 07:00 AM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:02 AM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:06 AM
The Shambles 15 Oct 06 - 07:06 AM
JennyO 15 Oct 06 - 09:40 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Oct 06 - 10:04 AM
The Shambles 15 Oct 06 - 11:20 AM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 11:21 AM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 11:25 AM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 12:30 PM
bobad 15 Oct 06 - 01:11 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Oct 06 - 01:25 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 05:51 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:07 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:10 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:11 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:12 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:13 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:14 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:15 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:17 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:18 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:19 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:22 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:23 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:25 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:28 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:29 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:31 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:31 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:38 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:40 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:41 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:42 PM
bobad 15 Oct 06 - 06:45 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:47 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:48 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 06:54 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:56 PM
Peace 15 Oct 06 - 06:56 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:01 PM
GUEST,surf's up 15 Oct 06 - 07:02 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:04 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:10 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 07:12 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Oct 06 - 07:56 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 08:15 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 15 Oct 06 - 09:15 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 09:40 PM
number 6 15 Oct 06 - 09:44 PM
GUEST 15 Oct 06 - 09:44 PM
Joe Offer 15 Oct 06 - 10:22 PM
The Shambles 16 Oct 06 - 02:22 AM
The Shambles 16 Oct 06 - 08:31 AM
The Shambles 16 Oct 06 - 12:15 PM
Bill D 16 Oct 06 - 01:36 PM
The Shambles 16 Oct 06 - 02:55 PM
Wesley S 16 Oct 06 - 02:58 PM
Peace 16 Oct 06 - 03:15 PM
The Shambles 16 Oct 06 - 03:16 PM
jeffp 16 Oct 06 - 03:22 PM
Little Hawk 16 Oct 06 - 03:29 PM
GUEST 16 Oct 06 - 03:45 PM
Wesley S 16 Oct 06 - 04:47 PM
Bill D 16 Oct 06 - 05:00 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Oct 06 - 05:03 PM
Wesley S 16 Oct 06 - 05:12 PM
GUEST 16 Oct 06 - 05:14 PM
Peace 16 Oct 06 - 05:18 PM
Wesley S 16 Oct 06 - 05:21 PM
number 6 16 Oct 06 - 11:26 PM
The Shambles 17 Oct 06 - 02:06 AM
The Shambles 17 Oct 06 - 02:17 AM
jeffp 17 Oct 06 - 06:47 AM
GUEST 17 Oct 06 - 08:01 AM
Wesley S 17 Oct 06 - 10:12 AM
Wesley S 17 Oct 06 - 10:20 AM
The Shambles 17 Oct 06 - 11:17 AM
John MacKenzie 17 Oct 06 - 12:07 PM
John MacKenzie 17 Oct 06 - 02:56 PM
Jeri 17 Oct 06 - 07:35 PM
The Shambles 18 Oct 06 - 02:07 AM
John MacKenzie 18 Oct 06 - 05:53 AM
The Shambles 18 Oct 06 - 07:49 AM
GUEST 18 Oct 06 - 09:03 AM
Big Mick 18 Oct 06 - 10:31 AM
GUEST 18 Oct 06 - 10:45 AM
GUEST 18 Oct 06 - 12:03 PM
GUEST 18 Oct 06 - 12:33 PM
GUEST,KB 18 Oct 06 - 12:46 PM
Peace 18 Oct 06 - 12:53 PM
Wesley S 18 Oct 06 - 01:20 PM
Wolfgang 18 Oct 06 - 04:11 PM
Wolfgang 18 Oct 06 - 04:17 PM
The Shambles 18 Oct 06 - 06:48 PM
GUEST 18 Oct 06 - 08:38 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 18 Oct 06 - 08:57 PM
Big Mick 18 Oct 06 - 09:02 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 18 Oct 06 - 10:55 PM
The Shambles 19 Oct 06 - 02:30 AM
The Shambles 19 Oct 06 - 04:55 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 19 Oct 06 - 09:24 AM
Big Mick 19 Oct 06 - 10:09 AM
The Shambles 19 Oct 06 - 10:13 AM
Peace 19 Oct 06 - 10:22 AM
MMario 19 Oct 06 - 10:22 AM
MMario 19 Oct 06 - 10:24 AM
The Shambles 19 Oct 06 - 10:31 AM
Peace 19 Oct 06 - 11:30 AM
MMario 19 Oct 06 - 11:37 AM
Peace 19 Oct 06 - 11:43 AM
MMario 19 Oct 06 - 11:47 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 19 Oct 06 - 11:52 AM
Emma B 19 Oct 06 - 11:58 AM
Peace 19 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 19 Oct 06 - 01:58 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 19 Oct 06 - 02:08 PM
Big Mick 19 Oct 06 - 03:09 PM
GUEST 19 Oct 06 - 07:43 PM
Big Mick 19 Oct 06 - 08:40 PM
GUEST 20 Oct 06 - 04:32 AM
The Shambles 20 Oct 06 - 07:24 AM
The Shambles 20 Oct 06 - 12:14 PM
MMario 20 Oct 06 - 12:24 PM
GUEST 20 Oct 06 - 12:40 PM
MMario 20 Oct 06 - 12:44 PM
The Shambles 20 Oct 06 - 12:47 PM
Amos 20 Oct 06 - 12:50 PM
MMario 20 Oct 06 - 01:00 PM
The Shambles 20 Oct 06 - 01:05 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 20 Oct 06 - 01:13 PM
Wesley S 20 Oct 06 - 01:16 PM
The Shambles 20 Oct 06 - 01:26 PM
Wesley S 20 Oct 06 - 01:39 PM
GUEST 20 Oct 06 - 04:30 PM
The Shambles 21 Oct 06 - 08:07 AM
The Shambles 21 Oct 06 - 08:12 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 21 Oct 06 - 09:58 AM
The Shambles 21 Oct 06 - 11:46 AM
Joe Offer 21 Oct 06 - 01:58 PM
The Shambles 21 Oct 06 - 03:05 PM
Peace 21 Oct 06 - 03:23 PM
number 6 21 Oct 06 - 06:03 PM
Peace 21 Oct 06 - 06:16 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 21 Oct 06 - 07:10 PM
number 6 21 Oct 06 - 09:03 PM
The Shambles 22 Oct 06 - 08:05 AM
John MacKenzie 22 Oct 06 - 08:26 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Oct 06 - 09:47 AM
The Shambles 22 Oct 06 - 11:04 AM
GUEST 22 Oct 06 - 11:38 AM
John MacKenzie 22 Oct 06 - 11:43 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 22 Oct 06 - 12:57 PM
Peace 22 Oct 06 - 01:03 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 05:53 AM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 06:39 AM
GUEST 23 Oct 06 - 09:25 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 09:40 AM
Peace 23 Oct 06 - 10:18 AM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 10:24 AM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 10:28 AM
JennyO 23 Oct 06 - 10:34 AM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 10:34 AM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 10:35 AM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 10:36 AM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 10:36 AM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 10:38 AM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 10:39 AM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 10:40 AM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 10:44 AM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 10:45 AM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 10:45 AM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 10:48 AM
Peace 23 Oct 06 - 01:16 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 01:19 PM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 01:56 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 01:57 PM
MMario 23 Oct 06 - 02:00 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 02:02 PM
GUEST 23 Oct 06 - 02:03 PM
MMario 23 Oct 06 - 02:19 PM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 02:24 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 02:49 PM
Big Mick 23 Oct 06 - 02:52 PM
Peace 23 Oct 06 - 02:55 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 02:56 PM
Peace 23 Oct 06 - 03:12 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 03:13 PM
Wesley S 23 Oct 06 - 03:22 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 03:26 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 03:27 PM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 03:32 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 03:32 PM
Wesley S 23 Oct 06 - 03:35 PM
John MacKenzie 23 Oct 06 - 03:45 PM
The Shambles 23 Oct 06 - 05:34 PM
Wesley S 23 Oct 06 - 05:43 PM
catspaw49 23 Oct 06 - 07:32 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 23 Oct 06 - 09:05 PM
The Shambles 24 Oct 06 - 02:33 AM
John MacKenzie 24 Oct 06 - 03:58 AM
The Shambles 24 Oct 06 - 05:41 AM
John MacKenzie 24 Oct 06 - 06:13 AM
GUEST 24 Oct 06 - 08:48 AM
Tweed 24 Oct 06 - 09:22 AM
GUEST 24 Oct 06 - 09:35 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Oct 06 - 09:44 AM
Wolfgang 24 Oct 06 - 10:22 AM
GUEST 24 Oct 06 - 01:11 PM
The Shambles 24 Oct 06 - 03:02 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Oct 06 - 03:23 PM
GUEST 24 Oct 06 - 03:48 PM
The Shambles 24 Oct 06 - 03:49 PM
John MacKenzie 24 Oct 06 - 04:03 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Oct 06 - 04:14 PM
GUEST 24 Oct 06 - 04:39 PM
Blowzabella 24 Oct 06 - 07:44 PM
The Shambles 25 Oct 06 - 02:50 AM
The Shambles 25 Oct 06 - 07:06 AM
The Shambles 25 Oct 06 - 07:09 AM
catspaw49 25 Oct 06 - 07:26 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Oct 06 - 09:28 AM
The Shambles 25 Oct 06 - 11:01 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Oct 06 - 11:17 AM
catspaw49 25 Oct 06 - 11:28 AM
Peace 25 Oct 06 - 11:37 AM
GUEST 25 Oct 06 - 11:37 AM
GUEST 25 Oct 06 - 12:21 PM
Bill D 25 Oct 06 - 01:38 PM
Big Mick 25 Oct 06 - 01:40 PM
The Shambles 26 Oct 06 - 02:00 AM
The Shambles 26 Oct 06 - 02:30 AM
The Shambles 26 Oct 06 - 02:39 AM
Joe Offer 26 Oct 06 - 02:41 AM
The Shambles 26 Oct 06 - 05:33 AM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 09:23 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 09:27 AM
John MacKenzie 26 Oct 06 - 09:57 AM
number 6 26 Oct 06 - 10:51 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 11:02 AM
Little Hawk 26 Oct 06 - 11:32 AM
jeffp 26 Oct 06 - 11:43 AM
Peace 26 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 12:02 PM
The Shambles 26 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM
Wesley S 26 Oct 06 - 12:10 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 12:42 PM
John MacKenzie 26 Oct 06 - 12:48 PM
Peace 26 Oct 06 - 01:12 PM
Pseudolus 26 Oct 06 - 01:17 PM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 01:22 PM
John MacKenzie 26 Oct 06 - 01:30 PM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM
number 6 26 Oct 06 - 04:29 PM
number 6 26 Oct 06 - 04:38 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 05:03 PM
Peace 26 Oct 06 - 05:21 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 05:27 PM
number 6 26 Oct 06 - 05:55 PM
Ebbie 26 Oct 06 - 06:33 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Oct 06 - 07:35 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Oct 06 - 07:39 PM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 08:01 PM
jeffp 26 Oct 06 - 08:10 PM
Peace 26 Oct 06 - 08:14 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Oct 06 - 08:23 PM
Big Mick 26 Oct 06 - 08:31 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Oct 06 - 08:32 PM
GUEST 26 Oct 06 - 08:34 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Oct 06 - 08:49 PM
Peace 26 Oct 06 - 08:52 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 27 Oct 06 - 12:07 AM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 02:26 AM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 03:06 AM
John MacKenzie 27 Oct 06 - 04:39 AM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 09:22 AM
Wesley S 27 Oct 06 - 09:36 AM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 10:21 AM
MMario 27 Oct 06 - 10:23 AM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 11:11 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 11:20 AM
Peace 27 Oct 06 - 11:34 AM
Wolfgang 27 Oct 06 - 11:40 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM
Bill D 27 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM
Peace 27 Oct 06 - 11:52 AM
John MacKenzie 27 Oct 06 - 12:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 12:09 PM
John MacKenzie 27 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM
number 6 27 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM
MMario 27 Oct 06 - 12:20 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 12:32 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 12:36 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 12:59 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 01:06 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 01:07 PM
Bill D 27 Oct 06 - 01:11 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 01:26 PM
Wolfgang 27 Oct 06 - 01:39 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 01:58 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM
MMario 27 Oct 06 - 02:15 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 02:15 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 02:16 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 02:19 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 27 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM
John MacKenzie 27 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM
catspaw49 27 Oct 06 - 02:22 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 02:31 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 02:32 PM
catspaw49 27 Oct 06 - 02:34 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 02:45 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 03:00 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 03:22 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 03:26 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 03:43 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 03:49 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Oct 06 - 03:59 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 04:07 PM
MMario 27 Oct 06 - 04:09 PM
Blowzabella 27 Oct 06 - 06:10 PM
John MacKenzie 27 Oct 06 - 06:12 PM
number 6 27 Oct 06 - 06:17 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 07:28 PM
bobad 27 Oct 06 - 07:33 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 07:44 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 07:50 PM
Bill D 27 Oct 06 - 08:16 PM
The Shambles 27 Oct 06 - 08:23 PM
catspaw49 27 Oct 06 - 09:20 PM
GUEST,.gargoyle 27 Oct 06 - 11:18 PM
Big Mick 27 Oct 06 - 11:30 PM
catspaw49 27 Oct 06 - 11:33 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 06 - 11:36 PM
GUEST 28 Oct 06 - 12:12 AM
Peace 28 Oct 06 - 12:20 AM
number 6 28 Oct 06 - 01:55 AM
Joe Offer 28 Oct 06 - 02:59 AM
The Shambles 28 Oct 06 - 04:42 AM
Joe Offer 28 Oct 06 - 05:39 AM
The Shambles 28 Oct 06 - 05:40 AM
wysiwyg 28 Oct 06 - 06:13 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 28 Oct 06 - 11:26 AM
GUEST 28 Oct 06 - 11:38 AM
Ebbie 28 Oct 06 - 01:31 PM
GUEST 28 Oct 06 - 02:10 PM
jeffp 28 Oct 06 - 03:06 PM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 07:02 AM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 07:40 AM
catspaw49 29 Oct 06 - 07:45 AM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 08:34 AM
Jerry Rasmussen 29 Oct 06 - 08:47 AM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 09:18 AM
jeffp 29 Oct 06 - 10:11 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Oct 06 - 10:11 AM
Bunnahabhain 29 Oct 06 - 10:15 AM
GUEST,lightnix 29 Oct 06 - 10:20 AM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 12:06 PM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 12:13 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Oct 06 - 12:21 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Oct 06 - 12:21 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Oct 06 - 12:21 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Oct 06 - 12:21 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Oct 06 - 12:22 PM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 29 Oct 06 - 12:22 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Oct 06 - 01:02 PM
number 6 29 Oct 06 - 01:25 PM
The Shambles 29 Oct 06 - 02:45 PM
Big Mick 29 Oct 06 - 02:54 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 06 - 02:57 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Oct 06 - 03:57 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 06 - 04:13 PM
Bill D 29 Oct 06 - 04:47 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 06 - 05:08 PM
autolycus 29 Oct 06 - 05:23 PM
GUEST,lightnix 29 Oct 06 - 06:11 PM
wysiwyg 29 Oct 06 - 06:21 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Oct 06 - 07:42 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 06 - 10:08 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 29 Oct 06 - 10:27 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 06 - 10:31 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 29 Oct 06 - 10:39 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 01:52 AM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 01:58 AM
GUEST 30 Oct 06 - 04:16 AM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 05:08 AM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 11:55 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 12:38 PM
John MacKenzie 30 Oct 06 - 12:45 PM
jacqui.c 30 Oct 06 - 12:47 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 12:48 PM
Ebbie 30 Oct 06 - 12:53 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 12:56 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 01:01 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 01:03 PM
catspaw49 30 Oct 06 - 01:14 PM
Wolfgang 30 Oct 06 - 01:34 PM
ranger1 30 Oct 06 - 01:50 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 03:16 PM
MMario 30 Oct 06 - 03:22 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 03:39 PM
GUEST 30 Oct 06 - 03:42 PM
Big Mick 30 Oct 06 - 03:48 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 03:51 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 03:52 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 03:57 PM
GUEST 30 Oct 06 - 04:19 PM
MMario 30 Oct 06 - 04:20 PM
number 6 30 Oct 06 - 04:21 PM
Big Mick 30 Oct 06 - 04:41 PM
GUEST 30 Oct 06 - 04:47 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 04:54 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 05:03 PM
Peace 30 Oct 06 - 05:09 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 30 Oct 06 - 05:10 PM
The Shambles 30 Oct 06 - 05:28 PM
The Shambles 31 Oct 06 - 02:06 AM
GUEST 31 Oct 06 - 08:25 AM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 02:29 AM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 04:41 AM
GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover 01 Nov 06 - 11:52 AM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 12:17 PM
MMario 01 Nov 06 - 12:28 PM
Wesley S 01 Nov 06 - 12:33 PM
Little Hawk 01 Nov 06 - 12:54 PM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 01:02 PM
MMario 01 Nov 06 - 01:08 PM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 01:54 PM
MMario 01 Nov 06 - 01:56 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 02:05 PM
Joe Offer 01 Nov 06 - 02:14 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 03:15 PM
Little Hawk 01 Nov 06 - 03:57 PM
Wesley S 01 Nov 06 - 04:04 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 04:09 PM
jeffp 01 Nov 06 - 04:09 PM
Bill D 01 Nov 06 - 04:11 PM
number 6 01 Nov 06 - 04:12 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 04:12 PM
Joe Offer 01 Nov 06 - 04:17 PM
jeffp 01 Nov 06 - 04:18 PM
jeffp 01 Nov 06 - 04:19 PM
MMario 01 Nov 06 - 04:29 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 04:37 PM
Joe Offer 01 Nov 06 - 04:40 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 04:44 PM
Little Hawk 01 Nov 06 - 05:16 PM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 06:02 PM
The Shambles 01 Nov 06 - 06:55 PM
number 6 01 Nov 06 - 07:43 PM
Joe Offer 01 Nov 06 - 08:57 PM
wysiwyg 01 Nov 06 - 09:07 PM
GUEST 01 Nov 06 - 11:15 PM
catspaw49 01 Nov 06 - 11:30 PM
The Shambles 02 Nov 06 - 02:12 AM
GUEST 02 Nov 06 - 07:10 AM
catspaw49 02 Nov 06 - 07:51 AM
GUEST 02 Nov 06 - 08:31 AM
Wolfgang 02 Nov 06 - 10:48 AM
The Shambles 02 Nov 06 - 12:32 PM
GUEST 02 Nov 06 - 01:30 PM
The Shambles 02 Nov 06 - 02:08 PM
Wesley S 02 Nov 06 - 02:17 PM
MMario 02 Nov 06 - 02:47 PM
GUEST 02 Nov 06 - 02:57 PM
GUEST 02 Nov 06 - 04:41 PM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 08:07 AM
GUEST 03 Nov 06 - 08:46 AM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 09:22 AM
GUEST 03 Nov 06 - 10:01 AM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 10:13 AM
GUEST 03 Nov 06 - 10:36 AM
catspaw49 03 Nov 06 - 12:51 PM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 01:04 PM
GUEST 03 Nov 06 - 01:08 PM
Wesley S 03 Nov 06 - 01:13 PM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 01:24 PM
Blowzabella 03 Nov 06 - 07:26 PM
The Shambles 03 Nov 06 - 08:13 PM
The Shambles 04 Nov 06 - 02:48 AM
The Shambles 05 Nov 06 - 04:24 AM
Manitas_at_home 05 Nov 06 - 05:52 AM
JennyO 05 Nov 06 - 06:22 AM
The Shambles 05 Nov 06 - 07:48 AM
GUEST 05 Nov 06 - 10:29 AM
Wolfgang 05 Nov 06 - 10:36 AM
Manitas_at_home 05 Nov 06 - 10:40 AM
GUEST 05 Nov 06 - 12:52 PM
GUEST 05 Nov 06 - 01:27 PM
The Shambles 05 Nov 06 - 02:14 PM
catspaw49 05 Nov 06 - 02:29 PM
GUEST 05 Nov 06 - 03:38 PM
McGrath of Harlow 05 Nov 06 - 03:48 PM
GUEST 05 Nov 06 - 04:21 PM
The Shambles 06 Nov 06 - 02:13 AM
George Papavgeris 06 Nov 06 - 02:24 AM
The Shambles 06 Nov 06 - 04:49 AM
John MacKenzie 06 Nov 06 - 05:49 AM
catspaw49 06 Nov 06 - 06:23 AM
The Shambles 06 Nov 06 - 06:24 AM
Manitas_at_home 06 Nov 06 - 06:26 AM
The Shambles 06 Nov 06 - 06:40 AM
GUEST 06 Nov 06 - 09:27 AM
The Shambles 07 Nov 06 - 04:38 AM
The Shambles 07 Nov 06 - 04:57 AM
GUEST 07 Nov 06 - 09:56 AM
Wesley S 07 Nov 06 - 10:34 AM
GUEST,the ghost of Vladimir Ulyanov 07 Nov 06 - 10:58 AM
Ebbie 07 Nov 06 - 11:51 AM
The Shambles 07 Nov 06 - 12:56 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Nov 06 - 01:04 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Nov 06 - 01:06 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 06 - 02:13 PM
The Shambles 07 Nov 06 - 07:22 PM
bobad 07 Nov 06 - 07:48 PM
The Shambles 07 Nov 06 - 07:49 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 07:39 AM
Wolfgang 08 Nov 06 - 08:01 AM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 08:34 AM
catspaw49 08 Nov 06 - 08:34 AM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 09:10 AM
GUEST 08 Nov 06 - 09:19 AM
manitas_at_work 08 Nov 06 - 10:02 AM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 12:09 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 12:36 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 12:50 PM
Wolfgang 08 Nov 06 - 01:23 PM
GUEST 08 Nov 06 - 01:36 PM
MMario 08 Nov 06 - 01:37 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 02:38 PM
MMario 08 Nov 06 - 02:40 PM
Manitas_at_home 08 Nov 06 - 03:13 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 05:45 PM
John MacKenzie 08 Nov 06 - 05:49 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 06:37 PM
The Shambles 08 Nov 06 - 07:07 PM
catspaw49 08 Nov 06 - 09:46 PM
The Shambles 09 Nov 06 - 02:20 AM
John MacKenzie 09 Nov 06 - 05:00 AM
The Shambles 09 Nov 06 - 05:23 AM
The Shambles 09 Nov 06 - 05:29 AM
manitas_at_work 09 Nov 06 - 06:08 AM
GUEST,jOhn 09 Nov 06 - 08:52 AM
GUEST 09 Nov 06 - 09:23 AM
catspaw49 09 Nov 06 - 09:50 AM
Wolfgang 09 Nov 06 - 04:17 PM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 06:15 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 06:32 AM
catspaw49 10 Nov 06 - 06:57 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 07:45 AM
John MacKenzie 10 Nov 06 - 07:55 AM
catspaw49 10 Nov 06 - 08:42 AM
Wolfgang 10 Nov 06 - 08:56 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 06 - 09:21 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 09:21 AM
GUEST 10 Nov 06 - 09:22 AM
Bagpuss 10 Nov 06 - 09:28 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 09:45 AM
Wolfgang 10 Nov 06 - 10:10 AM
Wolfgang 10 Nov 06 - 10:17 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 10:23 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 10:32 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 06 - 10:42 AM
GUEST 10 Nov 06 - 10:45 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 11:02 AM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 11:09 AM
John MacKenzie 10 Nov 06 - 11:22 AM
number 6 10 Nov 06 - 11:32 AM
manitas_at_work 10 Nov 06 - 11:47 AM
GUEST,An anonymous clone 10 Nov 06 - 11:54 AM
Ebbie 10 Nov 06 - 12:14 PM
bobad 10 Nov 06 - 12:23 PM
John MacKenzie 10 Nov 06 - 12:39 PM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 01:07 PM
John MacKenzie 10 Nov 06 - 01:09 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 06 - 01:19 PM
Ebbie 10 Nov 06 - 01:23 PM
GUEST,An anonymous clone 10 Nov 06 - 01:25 PM
jeffp 10 Nov 06 - 01:28 PM
John MacKenzie 10 Nov 06 - 01:32 PM
The Shambles 10 Nov 06 - 01:39 PM
Big Mick 10 Nov 06 - 01:43 PM
GUEST 10 Nov 06 - 01:52 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 06 - 02:33 PM
GUEST,skinny clone 10 Nov 06 - 05:08 PM
number 6 10 Nov 06 - 08:40 PM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 04:37 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 05:19 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 05:50 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 06:05 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 06:31 AM
John MacKenzie 11 Nov 06 - 06:56 AM
jacqui.c 11 Nov 06 - 08:16 AM
Wolfgang 11 Nov 06 - 08:18 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 10:47 AM
jacqui.c 11 Nov 06 - 10:54 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 11:01 AM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 11:36 AM
John MacKenzie 11 Nov 06 - 11:48 AM
GUEST 11 Nov 06 - 03:48 PM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 07:04 PM
John MacKenzie 11 Nov 06 - 07:12 PM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 07:51 PM
The Shambles 11 Nov 06 - 07:57 PM
GUEST 11 Nov 06 - 10:03 PM
Joe Offer 11 Nov 06 - 11:08 PM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 11:17 AM
John MacKenzie 12 Nov 06 - 11:35 AM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 12:14 PM
Big Mick 12 Nov 06 - 12:29 PM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 01:29 PM
John MacKenzie 12 Nov 06 - 01:40 PM
GUEST 12 Nov 06 - 01:40 PM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 01:52 PM
The Shambles 12 Nov 06 - 07:20 PM
GUEST 12 Nov 06 - 09:16 PM
The Shambles 13 Nov 06 - 02:03 AM
The Shambles 13 Nov 06 - 11:28 AM
The Shambles 13 Nov 06 - 07:56 PM
Wolfgang 14 Nov 06 - 05:09 AM
catspaw49 14 Nov 06 - 06:28 PM
number 6 14 Nov 06 - 07:04 PM
catspaw49 14 Nov 06 - 07:19 PM
McGrath of Harlow 14 Nov 06 - 07:41 PM
The Shambles 14 Nov 06 - 07:55 PM
The Shambles 14 Nov 06 - 08:00 PM
GUEST 14 Nov 06 - 08:07 PM
number 6 14 Nov 06 - 08:18 PM
bobad 14 Nov 06 - 09:04 PM
GUEST 14 Nov 06 - 11:29 PM
autolycus 15 Nov 06 - 04:43 PM
autolycus 17 Nov 06 - 03:09 AM
GUEST 17 Nov 06 - 09:37 AM
number 6 17 Nov 06 - 10:12 AM
GUEST 17 Nov 06 - 11:09 AM
autolycus 17 Nov 06 - 04:45 PM
The Shambles 19 Nov 06 - 01:31 PM
Peace 19 Nov 06 - 01:32 PM
Wolfgang 19 Nov 06 - 03:18 PM
autolycus 19 Nov 06 - 03:48 PM
GUEST 19 Nov 06 - 10:50 PM
The Shambles 20 Nov 06 - 12:36 PM
autolycus 20 Nov 06 - 02:25 PM
The Shambles 20 Nov 06 - 04:10 PM
Blowzabella 20 Nov 06 - 06:15 PM
The Shambles 21 Nov 06 - 07:19 AM
Blowzabella 21 Nov 06 - 08:12 AM
The Shambles 21 Nov 06 - 09:23 AM
The Shambles 22 Nov 06 - 06:44 AM
The Shambles 23 Nov 06 - 01:55 AM
The Shambles 24 Nov 06 - 08:51 AM
GUEST 25 Nov 06 - 06:35 AM
autolycus 25 Nov 06 - 07:05 AM
John MacKenzie 25 Nov 06 - 07:25 AM
The Shambles 25 Nov 06 - 07:56 AM
GUEST 25 Nov 06 - 09:43 AM
GUEST 25 Nov 06 - 09:51 AM
The Shambles 25 Nov 06 - 10:21 AM
The Shambles 25 Nov 06 - 09:02 PM
Joe Offer 25 Nov 06 - 09:48 PM
Jeri 25 Nov 06 - 10:29 PM
Jeri 25 Nov 06 - 10:29 PM
Joe Offer 25 Nov 06 - 11:46 PM
autolycus 26 Nov 06 - 04:51 AM
GUEST 26 Nov 06 - 06:29 AM
The Shambles 26 Nov 06 - 07:19 AM
The Shambles 27 Nov 06 - 09:07 PM
autolycus 28 Nov 06 - 03:10 AM
GUEST 28 Nov 06 - 03:31 AM
The Shambles 28 Nov 06 - 05:56 AM
John MacKenzie 28 Nov 06 - 06:28 AM
GUEST 28 Nov 06 - 06:38 AM
The Shambles 28 Nov 06 - 01:44 PM
GUEST 28 Nov 06 - 02:47 PM
GUEST 28 Nov 06 - 03:17 PM
Wolfgang 29 Nov 06 - 07:40 AM
GUEST 29 Nov 06 - 07:49 AM
GUEST 29 Nov 06 - 08:27 AM
GUEST 29 Nov 06 - 10:08 AM
GUEST 29 Nov 06 - 02:33 PM
John MacKenzie 29 Nov 06 - 02:43 PM
The Shambles 30 Nov 06 - 02:13 AM
autolycus 30 Nov 06 - 05:13 PM
The Shambles 01 Dec 06 - 10:32 AM
GUEST,Jon 01 Dec 06 - 11:05 AM
The Shambles 01 Dec 06 - 08:54 PM
GUEST 02 Dec 06 - 08:09 AM
John MacKenzie 02 Dec 06 - 08:26 AM
Manitas_at_home 02 Dec 06 - 11:02 AM
jeffp 02 Dec 06 - 12:36 PM
The Shambles 02 Dec 06 - 03:13 PM
Wolfgang 02 Dec 06 - 04:10 PM
The Shambles 02 Dec 06 - 04:29 PM
GUEST 02 Dec 06 - 04:47 PM
GUEST,anti Archers league 02 Dec 06 - 05:26 PM
Blowzabella 02 Dec 06 - 06:43 PM
GUEST 03 Dec 06 - 01:47 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 06:35 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 06:48 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 06:53 PM
Blowzabella 03 Dec 06 - 07:20 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 08:25 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 08:41 PM
GUEST 03 Dec 06 - 08:45 PM
The Shambles 03 Dec 06 - 08:49 PM
GUEST 03 Dec 06 - 09:21 PM
Manitas_at_home 04 Dec 06 - 02:00 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Dec 06 - 04:52 AM
JennyO 04 Dec 06 - 05:32 AM
Little Hawk 04 Dec 06 - 06:49 AM
Ruth Archer 04 Dec 06 - 08:41 AM
Little Hawk 04 Dec 06 - 09:25 AM
John MacKenzie 04 Dec 06 - 11:03 AM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 11:37 AM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 11:43 AM
JennyO 04 Dec 06 - 11:54 AM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 12:26 PM
JennyO 04 Dec 06 - 01:15 PM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 03:50 PM
GUEST 04 Dec 06 - 03:52 PM
autolycus 04 Dec 06 - 04:01 PM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 05:35 PM
Blowzabella 04 Dec 06 - 05:44 PM
The Shambles 04 Dec 06 - 06:29 PM
catspaw49 04 Dec 06 - 06:47 PM
The Shambles 05 Dec 06 - 02:12 AM
The Shambles 05 Dec 06 - 04:41 AM
GUEST 05 Dec 06 - 09:26 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Dec 06 - 10:04 AM
GUEST 05 Dec 06 - 10:39 AM
GUEST,Friend of a hated Moderator 05 Dec 06 - 10:49 AM
jeffp 05 Dec 06 - 11:11 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Dec 06 - 11:15 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Dec 06 - 11:20 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Dec 06 - 11:27 AM
GUEST 05 Dec 06 - 11:28 AM
Jeri 05 Dec 06 - 12:03 PM
autolycus 05 Dec 06 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 05 Dec 06 - 12:34 PM
GUEST 05 Dec 06 - 12:36 PM
John MacKenzie 05 Dec 06 - 12:46 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 05 Dec 06 - 01:32 PM
The Shambles 05 Dec 06 - 01:35 PM
GUEST 05 Dec 06 - 03:18 PM
The Shambles 06 Dec 06 - 02:19 AM
Joe Offer 06 Dec 06 - 02:50 AM
The Shambles 06 Dec 06 - 04:57 AM
manitas_at_work 06 Dec 06 - 05:41 AM
John MacKenzie 06 Dec 06 - 06:21 AM
autolycus 06 Dec 06 - 03:52 PM
Joe Offer 06 Dec 06 - 03:56 PM
GUEST 06 Dec 06 - 04:14 PM
MMario 06 Dec 06 - 04:20 PM
The Shambles 06 Dec 06 - 07:11 PM
The Shambles 06 Dec 06 - 08:16 PM
catspaw49 06 Dec 06 - 09:52 PM
number 6 06 Dec 06 - 09:59 PM
catspaw49 06 Dec 06 - 10:08 PM
GUEST 06 Dec 06 - 10:58 PM
GUEST 06 Dec 06 - 11:47 PM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 02:17 AM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 02:26 AM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 04:52 AM
Blowzabella 07 Dec 06 - 05:18 AM
John MacKenzie 07 Dec 06 - 05:35 AM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 09:07 AM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 09:18 AM
GUEST 07 Dec 06 - 09:24 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Dec 06 - 09:31 AM
GUEST 07 Dec 06 - 09:47 AM
wysiwyg 07 Dec 06 - 09:49 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Dec 06 - 09:56 AM
GUEST 07 Dec 06 - 11:05 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 07 Dec 06 - 11:46 AM
The Shambles 07 Dec 06 - 01:10 PM
MMario 07 Dec 06 - 01:17 PM
John MacKenzie 07 Dec 06 - 01:22 PM
autolycus 07 Dec 06 - 06:00 PM
GUEST 07 Dec 06 - 10:49 PM
Peace 08 Dec 06 - 12:07 AM
The Shambles 08 Dec 06 - 07:28 AM
The Shambles 08 Dec 06 - 08:40 AM
catspaw49 08 Dec 06 - 11:11 AM
John MacKenzie 08 Dec 06 - 11:38 AM
jeffp 08 Dec 06 - 11:40 AM
MMario 08 Dec 06 - 11:44 AM
The Shambles 08 Dec 06 - 01:33 PM
The Shambles 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM
Cluin 08 Dec 06 - 02:21 PM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: RE: Review: National Folk Festival, Canberra, 2006
From: GUEST,Porn
Date: 07 Aug 06 - 06:51 PM

Hi, man! Your rock! look for my site - porn for free, http://porn-station.blogspot.com - porn, [url="http://porn-station.blogspot.com"]porn[/url], and last, but not least - [url]http://porn-station.blogspot.com[/url]. Best Porn Links - every day.
    Sample of a typical deleted message, moved here for demonstration purposes. I moved all of the messages from August 10-12 into this thread, so people can see just what we've been deleting.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:04 AM

Shambles still here and why?

Deleted posts & closed threads

The above two threads have been subject to imposed closure and the following explanation provided in an inserted editing comment.

OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure.
-Joe Offer-


Perhaps those posters who are interested in this subject can be permitted to continue the debate on this new thread - without such flimsy excuses needing to be found - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - to close this thread too?

How exactly was this 'popular request' determined? For such action is certainly not popular with me. And as the originator of one of these threads and the subject of the other. Perhaps I could have been consulted before any form of action was imposed?

If any posters make request to our 'modertaors' for any threads be closed - cannot they just be told not to open them? As both of these threads were (originally at least) clearly titled.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: gnu
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:55 AM

Nope.
didn't take long....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

SSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:49 AM

So LOCK this one too!!!

D'uh

Why won't you mods do your jobs???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:56 AM

Oh no .... sorta like one of those annoying neighbours who come over to chat and complain endlessly about nothing you are interested in everytime you go out to cut the lawn or just want to sit on your porch alone and enjoy life.

sIx


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

Shambles-you piss me off.

A third of the worlds population dosn't know where there next meal is coming from, there is homelessness, child neglect etc, half the middle east is killing each other, and loads of other real problems, yet you witter on all day every day about cencorship on a folk music website!

get a fucking life, if you feel the need to campaign, at least choose a worthwhile cause, its just a website.

anyway= max said if you dont like it leave=
"shambles you are a big moany, shut up moaning or leave"

(Max, ages ago)


anyway=you never post nothing nice, or funny, or intersting or helpfull, you just moan, and make everybody fed up, loads of people left mudcat, i bet some of them left becase of you moaning.

you wont answer me, becase you havent got a good anser.

john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

Please delete him permanently.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM

Ya... I have a bb gun for neighbours like that....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:36 AM

"imposed closure" is redundant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:43 AM

OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure.
-Joe Offer-


Is this thread judged to have gone on long enough or to be 'Nasty enought to close yet?

Or is there not enough of a 'popular request' for it yet (how is this determined BTW)?


Is there no chance now of any joined-up thinking being undertaken on the part of our 'moderators' - before their knee-jerk reactions plunge our forum into yet more chaos?

For of course the message is now clearly being given here, as to how any poster who wishes a thread to be closed, can go about this. And our 'moderators' can place rather big hints which threads on what subjects they would prefer were not publicly discussed.

For of course this action is in fact telling posters and encouraging some of them (intentionally or otherwise) that the posting to any thread - of offensive language, abusive personal attacks and anything that could be judged as 'Nasty' - will not result in any action on the offending posts or against the offending posters - but will result in the threads closure and the prevention of the discussion contained in it.   

Now if our 'moderators' are really interested in the prevention of abusive personal attacks and general 'Nastyness' - the latest message given-out by this action - is just about certain to increase such things.

As this action is claimed and justified by being a response to a popular request - it will also ensure that mean-spirited posts judging the worth of fellow posters and calling for censorship action to be imposed on them - will also only increase as a result. Rather than these posters being told to concentrate on their own posts and to mind their own business.

Most witch-hunts, burnings and lynchings are said to be undertaken due to what is claimed to be by 'popular request'. Another term for this would be mob-rule.

When some accurate means of obtaining and demonstrating the wishes of the majority is undertaken before any action is taken - this is called democracy.

We are now told that our forum is not a democracy and that is fine. But perhaps from now on - any pretence that action is imposed due to 'popular request' can end - unless some real attempt is seen to be made to ascertain what the majority actually do wish - as opposed to acting on the wishes of noisy and unrepresentitive mob (only when these are the same wishes as our 'moderators') and claiming this is due to 'popular request'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,jOhn
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:50 AM

See, you havent got a good anser!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:56 AM

What was the question?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM

The question has to be "WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE"? I have known some thick skinned people in my life. I have known some stupid people in my life. I have known some pathetic people in my life. I have seen many people and known of many people (in that I include myself) being ignorant of protocol in certain situations and behaving thoughtlessly as a result. You(The Shambles) are by far the first person I have come across who does not know when to give up! I have nothing against you personally but have seen what your postings and indeed your threads consist of. I have also seen many others comments which you do not seem to take on board. You are engineering some sort of personal crusade against the very people who actually have some authority on mudcat (as you certainly have none, but for the grace of those who tolerate you).
I stick mainly to the music threads now as I have been fed up with seeing your attacks!
Please Shambles, either settle down and find a place you can be happy with on the mudcat...without trying to change it to suit your own requirements...or if you cannot settle to it, please depart and allow the others the joy and peace that can be found for the most part in BS.
Best wishes, Mike.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:17 PM

He owns the site and asked you to leave......shouldn't be anymore justification needed. But I gues you're just "special" aren't you Roger?.....LOL........

You really ARE mental Dude!

Spa


It does look as if the thought processes of one of us are more than a little confused..

For when the reports of my death had been greatly exaggerated or rather when you wrongly assumed that Max had actually stopped me from posting – you made this (rather touching) plea for my re-instatement…..

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:21 PM

Seems it shouldn't be so hard to understand. The folks that run and keep the site going have the right and duty to moderate the threads. This is a matter of what is and ought to be, and those that don't like it have no grounds to stand on.

And it is no threat to anything on any level whatsoever.

Art Thieme


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:37 PM

PLEASE CLOSE THIS ONE, TOO!!
    Nope. Until Max pulls the plug on him, Shambles gets his one complaint thread to express what's important to him. If it gets out of hand, I'll close it and he can start another thread.
    But if I close this one now, Shambles will just start another thread, and another after that, and another. I have no desire to do battle with him. I wish people would ignore him so maybe be'd be talking to a wall and get bored and talk about something else, or go away.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM

PLEASE!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,jOhn
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:47 PM

QUICKLY!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:50 PM

Or, maybe, you fucking whiners could just quit feeding him? "WAAAAAHHHH! MAKE HIM STOP, MOMMY!!!!" You're shrieking louder than he is. You knew what this was before you opened it, and yet you opened it anyways. Why? Just to whine? To demand it be closed? Ignore it. Or can't you resist opening it, and reading it? Because, like Shambles, you just have to have some idiotic cause to bitch about?

---Lepus Rex


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:55 PM

So you come in here and join us in whining?

Take your own advice before you try to hand it out, Lupus....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:14 PM

But I'm not bothered by any of it, really. And I'm not asking anyone to close a thread. I saw the thread title, thought "Huh, what's Shambles complaining about today?" Not terribly interested, but so bored with reading the endless "Gaza" thread that I imagined I'd find better entertainment elsewhere, I opened the thread. Read a bit of it. "Ah, same thing, then." Shambles doing the usual Shambles thing, and his usual detractors either trying to shout him down, or to reason with him, as if this time, he'll get it. Blah, blah, blah. I cut to the end of the thread, saw there you three jackasses braying in unison, and thought I'd ask what, exactly, Shamblesphobic individuals such as yourselves are even doing on this thread. Not a good question?

---Lepus Rex


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:18 PM

And Lepus Rex..what are you feeding?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:32 PM

Well, I read Shambles threads because they're pretty funny, but I don't normally contribute. Yet, that one was closed down right after he responded to my otherwise mild comment. Perhaps I do have a purpose in this universe after all!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:38 PM

Hopefully their little hive minds, Georgiansilver. Like artbrooks, I read these for entertainment. Shambles may be annoying, in some ways, but I hate seeing people try to shut him down. He's not hurting anyone, and, for the most part, he keeps this sort of thing in his own threads. And although Shambles seems to be beyond accepting any kind of advice, the others may bemore receptive. Or so one would hope.

---Lepus Rex


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:16 PM

The question has to be "WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE"?

If you are really interested - you will find the answer contained in the following (but now closed thread).

Shambles still here and why?

You are engineering some sort of personal crusade against the very people who actually have some authority on mudcat (as you certainly have none, but for the grace of those who tolerate you).

Mike - if anyone were doing such a strange thing - the reasoning behind why someone would just up and decide to just do such a thing would possibly be something to query. Many would agree that the idea that someone would just up and do such a thing is a stange concept to accept and be ready to condemn such a thing - so why would you or anyone accept such a strange suggestion at face value to be the truth?

The fact that some here would like you to believe such a strange concept would of course let them off of the hook and relieve them from any responsibility. So how likely is it that such a strange concept is all or even part of the truth?

But is questioning - if the purpose nature of any authority is achieving its stated aims, considering that it may in fact be counter-productive and making suggestions as to how these aims may be achieved by less intrusive displays of this authority - to question that overall authority?

I feel that any delegated authority that felt that the correct response to such suggestions should be a hostile one and make constant attempts to supress public discussion of this subject - would be one that was insecure and unsure of the ability of their authority in achieving its stated aims but determined to hang on to this authority - regardless.

It is clear that any personally motivated 'crusade', campaign or special treatment has been engineered against my contributions and justified as something far more noble. What is then being encouraged to be judged harshly - is the fairly understandable reaction to this.

Mine is a determined reaction but a fair one. I do not resort to the name-calling and abusive personal judgements that are the example of acceptable posting set by the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and subsequently justified, minimised and excused. And I do not respond in kind to the many that are encouraged to be posted at me and which I receive no protection from. I simply try to inform our forum of this - despite the attempts to prevent and restrict this.

I am often urged to concentrate on music related threads. If the assumption is being that my posts will be safe from the special attentions and imposed judgement of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - this assumption would be wrong.

Do you not also think it strange that whenever I produce the evidence of the examples set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, in posting the many name-calling abusive personal judgements of me - some noble sounding reason is found (by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team) to close that thread?      

OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure.
-Joe Offer-


The case for the many forms of selective and personally motivated special treatment imposed on my posts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - is a strong one to anyone with an open mind. And perhaps should be addressed before too many harsh judgements are made of any reaction to them?

Based on the number of threads on this subject that he has found reasons to close - the case that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team simply does not wish this subject to be discussed on our forum - is a pretty strong one also...........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:23 PM

Blah... blah... blah... blah.....

Shambles.... your 'voice' continues to be muffled by your buttocks


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:57 PM

Shambles. NO ONE CARES!!! There is not one other person who is constantly complaining here. Why should anything be changed because one person out of many is unhappy? You are the lone objector to the so-called editing. Why not channel these complaints and your never give-up actions to something worthwhile like fighting hunger or getting us out or Iraq. Persistence would be respected in a battle like that. It's just laughed at when you spend so much time complaining about editing meaningless threads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:33 PM

SSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:36 PM

You sprung another leak Mick?

At your size, I'm not surprized!

:-P
Heh


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 06:49 PM

Nope. Until Max pulls the plug on him, Shambles gets his one complaint thread to express what's important to him. If it gets out of hand, I'll close it and he can start another thread.
But if I close this one now, Shambles will just start another thread, and another after that, and another. I have no desire to do battle with him. I wish people would ignore him so maybe be'd be talking to a wall and get bored and talk about something else, or go away.
-Joe Offer-


You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

But too much notice should not be taken of these type of assurances - grandly made for public consumption - that are provided in editing comments by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

The following will demonstrate that he is not a man who believes he needs to stand by his word.

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


The above assurance was given in   Do you need to be censored?   before the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team subjected it to imposed closure and (along with all the other threads on this subject) - it is now closed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:03 PM

So as not to risk providng any excuse for any further form of imposed censorship - I will not copy and paste the evidence here, that usually results in this action - but simply provide a link to it - in the already closed thread.

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804754


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:10 PM

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804666


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM

PLEASE CLOSE THIS USELESS THREAD!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM

The thread is NOT useless for Shambles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bert
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:42 PM

Some other folks seem to be enjoying it too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:56 PM

Sham sez -

"You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

But too much notice should not be taken of these type of assurances - grandly made for public consumption - that are provided in editing comments by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team."

If Joe is grandly making these statements for public consumption then why is he inserting them into an existing post so that it does not refresh the thread?

Hmmm? Awaiting your reply Roger.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John O'L
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:11 PM

Same old posse eh?

You supply the bread & butter, Shambles supplies the bullshit, you eat the sandwich.

Carry on. You deserve each other.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:22 PM

If Joe is grandly making these statements for public consumption then why is he inserting them into an existing post so that it does not refresh the thread?

Jolly good question. I don't know......... Why not ask him........?

Seems it shouldn't be so hard to understand. The folks that run and keep the site going have the right and duty to moderate the threads. This is a matter of what is and ought to be, and those that don't like it have no grounds to stand on.

Seems like it IS hard to understand. Would you view your Government is such an open and trusting way? For you are prepared to take on trust that this moderation is acceptable, when you currently have no way of being informed of the true nature and current level of imposed censorship on our forum. Possibly you are prepared to do this because its abuses are being inflicted on me and other posters but not on you?

The issue is not one of me questioning the right to moderate (or not) this forum.

It is one of questioning the nature of it and if what is claimed - matches up to the reality of what is actually happening. Whether the posters have protection form any personally motivated bias and whether 'moderators' have any protection from accusations of this. Whether what is lost – is worth what is gained.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team often justifies action against something simple like a post appearing in more than one thread – as being unfair. But does not seem to see that imposing 'silent deletion' as a first and only resort to such things, may be thought to be disproportionate, mean-spirited and equally unfair.   

The following indicate a number of problems that tend to get brushed aside in the rush to judge this complicated and thorny issue in simple black and white terms.

OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure.
-Joe Offer-


If there really were grounds - the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team should be prepared to take full responsibility for whatever action he felt forced to take. And be prepared to defend it on those grounds. If not – no action should be imposed.

There should be no need to hide behind the idea that his authority came from the posters - if his authority comes from Max. For it is clear that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is left to act as he wishes but is insecure enough to feel that some appeal must also be given for some public support for his actions.

The impression currently being given by this, is of a strange mixture of 'mob-rule' and carrying out the commands of a strict faceless dictator whilst at the same time maintaining some pretence that none of this was really happening.

And then there is the type of action chosen (I have detailed my views already in this thread on thread closure). This is totally ineffective. It is used mainly as a means to look as if some action was being taken when all it amounts to is, a futile display of power – which just proves how powerless those using this method are but which divides our forum, like nothing else.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM

Oh well had typed this up earlier but decided to leave alone. Only posting now as John O L rekons (at least some of) the usual suspects were not leaving alone... This follows a comment from the why here therad. I think several of us who eventual post only post a fraction of what we feel like posting...

Perhaps as this method - by the current Chief of the Mudcat editing Team's own admission, has not suuceeded in imposing the peace he requires and is proving somewhat counter-productive

The only person making causing problems with the current system is you. If you won't leave, try taking a break for 6 months and see what happens without you. Unless Bert decides to try to prove a point on your behalf, 99% of the problems you complain about will go.

- it is time for a new Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and a more stylish method?

Interesting to see that you want new methods now. It was a return to the old before. Let's face it, it's not about improving Mudcat anyway - that's been obvious for years.

At least you have been a little more open in calling for Joe Offers head this time. We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

It's a good job you are not doing the equivalant at the Annexe or Folkinfo btw. Pip and I were brought up in an old fashioned way whereby abusing "volunteers" would be considered a far greater crime than constantly having a go at ourselves. You would have gone a long time ago anyway as reasoning is impossible but repeats of that sort of behaviour would have hastened your departure. Fortunately for you, Mudcat seems to work the other way round.

Anyway, back to new ideas. Although the bbc moderation system is by far the most screwed up I've seen. they have one idea that I think is great for dealing with persistant pests. Such posters find themselves on "pre-mod" this means that while other posters messages appear in "real time" (and may be subjected to moderation afterwards), the trouble maker's posts have to be read by a moderator and approved before they can be read by others. The situation is only a temporary one and users are returned to "post-mod" if they post "normaly". On the other hand, if they chose to continue, they find themselves banned either temporarily or permanantly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:59 AM

At least you have been a little more open in calling for Joe Offers head this time. We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

It's a good job you are not doing the equivalant at the Annexe or Folkinfo btw. Pip and I were brought up in an old fashioned way whereby abusing "volunteers" would be considered a far greater crime than constantly having a go at ourselves. You would have gone a long time ago anyway as reasoning is impossible but repeats of that sort of behaviour would have hastened your departure. Fortunately for you, Mudcat seems to work the other way round.


Jon - it is unfortunate for me (and others) that it works the other way around.

For the clear facts (that you chose to ignore) that it is (some of) these 'volunteers' especially the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, who are the ones posting abusive personal judgements. And more importantly, setting the example for others to follow, that this is acceptable posting behavior.

Do you consider that 'moderators' making abusive personal judgements and name-calling is acceptable? If it is not judged as acceptable for others - then it should not have been done and continue to be done by those who should know better.

My 'crime' - if it is one - as a victim of thise - is to try and demonstrate the reality of it - rather than the 'spin'. I consider that my posting record is better than many of those who would feel themselves qualified to judge me and other posters.

And yes - I judge that the example shown by (some of) these 'moderators' should disqualify them from imposing their judgement on others but there is nothing personal in this. How can there be - our forum is not trusted to know many of their names.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 04:44 AM

Am I wrong to consider the imposed censorship action detailed in the following - as a continuation of personally motivated and selective treatment by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804627


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM

Subject: (thread title change complaint)
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 01:19 PM

Well, I suppose it depends on what you think of the Forum Menu. Shambles believes in a right to free speech - and I think most of us do. He thinks that the Forum Menu is a vehicle for self-expression and that the right of free speech should extend to the Forum Menu, and I think the Forum Menu is merely an index.

Shambles is a pioneer here, because he was one of the very first to attempt to use the Forum Menu as a platform for expression. When he started his PEL campaign in 2001, he worked hard to ensure that several PEL threads were visible on the Forum Menu at any given time. He'd refresh several PEL threads, all with the same lengthy message, to keep his PEL campaign in the people's eye. He even started threads that had the sole purpose of directing people to other PEL threads. He worked hard to fight for "turf" on the Forum Menu, making sure his PEL campaign stood out above all other topics of discussion.

His PEL campaign was a very worthy cause, but his technique got to be too much. He was flooding the Forum with words, crowding out others who weren't so wordy. He often titled threads with deceptive titles like the ones you find in virus and advertising e-mails - the ones that try to trick you into opening them.

So, a number of things were done to hold Shambles back a bit, since he didn't seem to be able to control himself. His PEL threads were given PEL tags, and they were crosslinked so he wouldn't need to keep repeating things that people could easily find in other threads.

So, yes, many of the Shambles threads were retitled - they had a PEL tag added to them. Some (but not most) of the lengthy duplicate messages he posted were deleted - but one copy of each message was always left intact, and only the duplicates were deleted.

Shambles went overboard, and kept on going overboard for months. Finally, he was subjected to a few controls - although not one of his words was deleted unless it was a duplicate of another statement he posted.

So,Shambles has been having a tantrum since 2001. And as he went overboard on the PEL campaign and actually served to make his issue look ridiculous by the outrageous quantity and exaggeration of his remarks, he also does the same with his campaign against the editing work done at Mudcat. Gee, he even compares me to Hitler, and that's SO unfair. I have much nicer facial hair.

So, that's the story.


That is one side of the story - based on many groundless assumptions and pointless personal judgements. But it does demonstrate the difficulties created on our forum when the personal likes and dislikes of a fellow poster are mixed-up (by some) with the role of 'moderator'.

Surely the first requirement of any 'moderator' to be seen to be acting impartially and not to be seen to be justifying the setting of poor examples of posting behavior and of openly encouraging support for their position from the mob?

What is required is an end to division and a example set that encourages all posters to feel safe to contribute. Rather than the current example introduced - which confuses and inhibits posting by encouraging the posting only of personal judgements of the worth of fellow posters. When it is what is said that is important - not who may be saying it.

The requests made about the PEL posts are being followed - but the same punishments are still being imposed. The new and selective restrictions that apply to my posts only, which have been imposed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team are being followed - but still the same assumptions and personal judgements are being encouraged to be made.......How many times should a poster be punished over and over for the same old alledged 'crime'?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:31 AM

We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

Jon - I have provided evidence here for (only some) of the abusive personal attacks, persoanal judgements and name-calling, that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team judges is a good example to set to the rest of our forum as acceptable posting behaviour.

Are you not going to pass judgement on this abuse and speculate on the reasons for it?

Can you supply any similar evidence for your accusation of my 'continued abuse of him and the volunteers'? If you cannot - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:40 AM

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1805977

The above link is to a post about our 'war on terrorism' - with which sentiments I entirely agree.

Some may maintain that it has little or no relevance to this debate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM

Shambles all the evidence I have seen points to you harrasing the admin team. I will grant you that Joe has on more than one occassion bitten back but while one could argue he shouldn't have, I'm not surprised this has happened given your daily provocation for years.

The real shame is that the whole business has been allowed to go on so long that Joe has snapped, enabling you to add to your "evidence of persecution".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:24 AM

I will grant you that Joe has on more than one occassion bitten back but while one could argue he shouldn't have, I'm not surprised this has happened given your daily provocation for years.

Jon - your accusation was - your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

If you cannot supply evidence of this 'abuse' - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise?

Perhaps as you excuse the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team for having - on more than one occassion bitten back perhaps you credit me (and other posters) for not following his example that such biting back - was ever acceptable posting behaviour for any poster on our forum - and especially not any trusted with an edit button.

You appear to support the multi-standard of conduct which is at the very heart of this debate.

but while one could argue he shouldn't have There is no argument. No 'moderator' can afford to be seen to ever do this, even once................For the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to be seen to repeatedly do this - repeatedly attempt to minimise, justfy and excuse it - is just total hypocrisy. It is now a case of do as I tell you - not as I do.

It is only going to clearly demonstrate that there is now one rule for those who feel themselves qualified to judge and another for the judged. And that any defence of this and any attempts to shift the blame, will discredit and bring into question the honest efforts of all involved.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:27 AM

Jon - your accusation was - your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

If you cannot supply evidence of this 'abuse' - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise?


Shambles, I repeat the accusation and I will point you to your posting history over the past years as evidence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:37 AM

Shambles, I repeat the accusation and I will point you to your posting history over the past years as evidence.

Such as?

If this so-called abuse was as you have publicly alleged - it should not be too difficult to provide as least as many examples of the abusive personal judgements and name-calling from me - as I have provided from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to me. There are many more such examples of these.................

I ask again - if you cannot provide any support for your accusations - would you please withdraw them?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:42 AM

Shambles, I REPEAT my accusation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Grab
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 08:01 AM

Also been taking a break for a bit, but this was a good one.

Jon - your accusation was - your continued abuse of him and the volunteers.

If you cannot supply evidence of this 'abuse' - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise?


For over two years, you've said that he's not telling the truth when he gives his reasons for restricting/renaming your posts, so we have "liar" as the primary one. I have to say that if I'd been called a liar by someone every day for two years, I'd be a bit unhappy too.

For the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to be seen to repeatedly do this - repeatedly attempt to minimise, justfy and excuse it - is just total hypocrisy

OK, we have "hypocrite" too.

insecure and unsure of the ability of their authority in achieving its stated aims but determined to hang on to this authority

So we have "power-mad" too.

Shambles, you seem to believe that just because you haven't actually used any swear-words, you haven't insulted anyone. Believe me, that isn't so.

You also seem to feel that you've not insulted anyone because you've not said outright "you're a hypocrite" but instead said "this is hypocrisy", or you've not said outright "you're a liar" but instead said "why should I accept that to be the truth?". Frankly that just makes you gutless, playing semantics just so that you can say "I never actually said that".

Graham.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jacqui.c
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 08:21 AM

Roger - I would think that both Jon and Grab have too much of a life to want to sift through all your postings for the past years to provide the excat quotes. Maybe you should get a life too.

I would agree totally with Jon's premise - it is clear from your posts (and I'm not going to look for specific ones either) that you have the knives out for Joe, in particular, and the rest of the team. I also agree with Grab's last paragraph in his post 10 August 8.01. You constantly insult the intelligence of the members of the Mudcat forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 08:53 AM

Graham before you scratch around trying to find something to judge my posting conduct as wanting (without providing and evidence and by putting your words in my mouth) - perhaps you may have more creditibilty if you will first pass the same judgement and comment on the many examples of abusive personal judgements and name-calling publicly posted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and evidenced here? And the example set that this is acceptable posting behaviour.

For if you do not - how could you then judge the posting conduct of any ordinary poster as wanting - if they were to just follow this example set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

You may accept there is a difference between expressing your views as as honestly as you can in a post and posting only abusive personal judgements and name-calling or responding in kind.

I have always resisted this and have always tried to limit my posts to my views only and not make any personal judgements of the poster. A quick look back through this thread should be enough for you to verify that. I feel there is a difference between stating the reasons why you do not agree with another poster and then going on to use offensive language, calling them names and suggesting that they go away and do rude things with their hat.

For example a post saying: I think this -

Rather than a post saying: I think this and therefore you are a ''''''' [insert the offensive name of your choice].

Most of the abusive personal attacks and judgements made on me by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team and more importantly his open incitement for others to follow suit (that I have evidenced here) - were as a result of him feeling that I was treating him unfairly.

In fact I was simply judging his actions in the same way that that he considered was fair - when he was not only judging the posting actions of others but was also imposing his judgement upon their posts and threads. He felt that I had no right to even judge or question his actions. And of course I had no ability to impose my judgement on his contributions.

My view is that their should be one set of rules for those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on others and one for the rest of us. The rules and expectation of conduct of those who would wish to judge us - should be far higher. And they should remove themselves from this position - even when there is the slightest suspicion that they have may fallen from showing the very highest example of conduct.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:00 AM

at least 7 inconsistancies in the last post by shambles and the proof existing in threads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:13 AM

For over two years, you've said that he's not telling the truth when he gives his reasons for restricting/renaming your posts, so we have "liar" as the primary one. I have to say that if I'd been called a liar by someone every day for two years, I'd be a bit unhappy too.

What then is the word to use for someone who states:

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


And then closes not only that one - but every other thread on the subject.........

I am more than a bit unhappy that my posting conduct is now being judged wanting and singled-out for special restrictions by those whose example of posting conduct - I have demonstrated - to be far more questionable than mine.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:18 AM

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

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

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:27 AM

I realy don't want to get involved any more but something has been bugging me all the time here.

Roger, will you please answer a straight question with a straight answer. Why do you insist on calling Joe 'the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team'? Isn't Joe easier? Or even Mr Offer if you want to be formal? Joe always refers to you as Shambles or Roger. What is it with not mentioning his name? Is it an actor type thing? Like MacBeth. Or is there some sort of legal implication that no-one else is aware of?

I am realy interested to know. I'm sure other people are as well!

Cheers

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:44 AM

For some time I have requested that editing comments are not inserted into my posts without my permission. My concern is that often these so-called editing-comments are nothing of the sort. They are (mis) used - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - as a way of placing his personal views on the thread's subject but without refreshing the thread. A facility that is not open to ordinary posters.

My request has not been accepted and this practice continues - (some of) our 'moderators' do seem to have plenty of time to insert editing comments and would appear to think this quite fun......

Another request has been made for all case where any form of imposed censorship action is judged to have been required - for this to always be indicated and for some (very brief) explanation of the reasons to be given in an editing comment.

This would ensure that posters would for the first time be able to see and express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of censorship on our forum.

This request has also not been accepted.   

Some of the reasons provided were that this would needlessly bring attention to the offending post or thread. And rather surprisingly, considering my difficulty in preventing editing comment from being inserted in my posts - that it would place an extra burden on our 'moderators'.

I would argue that all it would need to do is bring attention to when censorship was thought necessary and that (some of) our 'moderators' do not currently appear to find placing editing camments currently too much of a burden.
    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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:54 AM

You are outputting a lot today shambles. But none of it will get away from your persistant abuse of the volunteers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:08 AM

"Why do you insist on calling Joe 'the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team'? Isn't Joe easier?"

Because Shambles is a passive aggressive little twat that needs to be slapped the hell off this message board... The problem is, he fits in almost perfectly with the people who own/run the place.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:18 AM

I am realy interested to know. I'm sure other people are as well!

OK

I see the main problem and cause of much of the conflict on our forum - as one of trying to combine two roles - that of 'moderator' and fellow poster. I am not sure this is now the best approach.....

I use the name of the role for a number of reasons. To try and show when my argument is with the actions of the role itslf - rather than any personal argument with the current individual fellow poster who happens to be in that role.

however, it is well known that the current holder of that role has some very strong views on how they want our forum to look and function. And for this reason, I am not sure that it is possible for posters to always be able to tell which hat is being worn. Perhaps a lot of support is for the individual currently in the role and it is thought disloyal to be seen to disagree with this individual - rather than taking a more objective view?   

Having someone so committed as the current holder in this role, does have advantages - it also has disadvantages. I must confess that I think the disadvantages are beginning to out-number the advantages.

So I propose myself for the role. *smiles*

When I first started posting here there was no Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who so readily imposed his judgement on my posts, threatened me and called me names - just my fellow posters - one of whom was Joe Offer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:22 AM

You are outputting a lot today shambles. But none of it will get away from your persistant abuse of the volunteers

Jon - put-up or shut-up.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Grab
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:25 AM

if you will first pass the same judgement and comment on the many examples of abusive personal judgements and name-calling publicly posted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and evidenced here?

If you're as keen on looking back through history as you seem to be, you may find the posts in which I said I thought Joe was out of line in insulting you. However, I also said that I could understand why he did it, in light of months/years of provocation. You yourself have just said that you consider him to be a liar, an opinion which I doubt is recent, since you have been implying for months/years that he's a liar.

You certainly do, now, have evidence of people disliking you personally, Joe for one. Back in 2001 though, before the addition of Joe's "three little words" set you off, did you have any evidence of this? Your assertion is that all moderation actions on your posts have been driven by moderators' personal dislike of you (or at least that this could be the case). This would require that they (and Joe especially) disliked you *before* they did any of it. If you can find evidence of this from 2001 or earlier, I'm all ears. If not, your assertion lacks a basis in available evidence, when the alternative (that you were mass-mailing the forum and posting off-topic in the way which Joe described, in order to promote your viewpoint) has no shortage of evidence.

And they should remove themselves from this position - even when there is the slightest suspicion that they have may fallen from showing the very highest example of conduct.

This is your personal opinion, and that's fine. However you are in no position to force them to do so - Max is the only person who can, and you haven't convinced him (rather the opposite, since he has publicly requested you to shut up or leave). Peer pressure *may* be able to persuade them, but you'd need a significant number of active members who share your opinion in order to swing any influence. If you've not found these people in four years of trying, then I submit that it's never going to happen. In that case, you should be considering the possibility that your viewpoint is in the minority. You should also consider the possibility that in insulting people until they "fall" and react to the insults, you aren't in a strong position.

Graham.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM

" So I propose myself for the role."

Sweet merciful crap on a cake, no.......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM

Jon - put-up or shut-up.

Interesting Shambles, after only a few hours and a handful of posts you are telling me to shut up.

Quite amzing for someone who complains so bitterly about the occasional angry comment made to him following years of daily abuse.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:34 AM

"When I first started posting here there was no Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who so readily imposed his judgement on my posts, threatened me and called me names - just my fellow posters - one of whom was Joe Offer."

I'm curious- Chief Carper, in your estimation, which happened first? Did Joe one day decide that he needed someone to harass? And you were a convenient target? Or were you perhaps loading the Cat as you are now? I remember the days when you admired Joe Offer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:35 AM

did I glean from that message above, Roger, that you suggest that you would be an OBJECTIVE moderator?

different, I'm sure!.....objective? Well, scholars differ.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:42 AM

I remember the days when you admired Joe Offer.

So do I. That was in those days when he set a posting example that I was more than happy to follow.

As to what happened - he seemed to think that what was once best achievable by setting a good example was better achieved by threats.

I think he is wrong.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:44 AM

Perhaps setting a good example was no longer working.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:45 AM

Well setting a bad one certainly isn't.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:49 AM

So you're judging it to be bad?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:49 AM

No... it's not... so why are you doing it Shambles?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:50 AM

And Roger - you don't see your part in any of this? Joe just suddenly turned on you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

And Roger - you don't see your part in any of this? Joe just suddenly turned on you?

See my post here10 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM

The PEL threads were too much for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - who made so many wrong assunption, personalised the whole thing and got his knickers so competly twisted that they have never unravelled since.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 12:11 PM

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 12:32 PM

See my post here10 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

Moving swiftly on A Musical Interlude


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

100!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

&1
Skipy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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...."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Fieldvole
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 01:54 PM

Shambles, when I asked Joe why we couldn't put a message in place of
the deletion, he gave me a perfectly good answer. That it is more
awkward for the admin team to do that, on this particular type of
message board, than it is to just delete the post.

It also bu**ers up THEIR record of events, and that is more
important than OUR knowing where a post has gone to.

Now, much as I agree in a way with a lot of what you are saying,
that is the answer that is given and we will just have to leave it
at that and live with it.

PLEASE!!

Fieldvole


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM

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-


You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

Joe - are you serious trying to inform our forum that you did NOT close the thread that I am referring to?

Or that you are going to continue to maintain a pretence to our forum that you are not fully aware of which thread I am referring to?

Which having closed it - you are of course perfectly aware.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:19 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM

Shambles, when I asked Joe why we couldn't put a message in place of the deletion, he gave me a perfectly good answer.

I agree with much of what you say also.

And I am glad to see that you are satisfied with your answer.

I note your request, but as I consider what you may choose to post is a matter for you - perhaps you will accept that what I choose to post is a matter for me?

However the question is less why this could not be done as why the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not WANT to do it.

For I am quite sure that IF he did want to do this - or indeed anything else - it would be done - whatever its effect and whether you or I liked it or not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:25 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:43 PM

For I am quite sure that IF he did want to do this - or indeed anything else - it would be done - whatever its effect and whether you or I liked it or not.

And that he would do this - even after assuring our forum (in an editing comment) that it would not be done.

A fact evidenced in this thread by me - and still ignored by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.....

And who still expects his words to be given some credit.......

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.
-Joe Offer-

Instead of just using this as an excuse for more groundless personal judgements - perhaps it can be explained to our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team why this assurance given by him to our forum in an editing comment - was not honoured?
And why no apology is provided for not doing so?
And why our forum should expect any other assurance given by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team to be honoured?


Or instead of this - will some urgent excuse be found by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to close this thread also?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:57 PM

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.

So shambles demonstrates his compulsion again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 03:13 PM

OK, Roger. You judge. I have undeleted every message the volunteers and I deleted in the last three days, and I have moved them all into this thread. Please tell the nice people why I should have to post an explanation for all of these deletions. These are normal examples of the messages we delete.

You will note that they are ALL porn or Spam messages from anonymous posters, except for one message from weelittledrummer that doesn't make sense without the porn present. I'm sure weelittledrummer won't mind.

As for a Licensing Act thread being closed, the only one I can think of, is Affected by the Licensing Act 2003. It was closed (with explanation and crosslink posted) for a few days in April or May, 2006, because somebody had started a newer thread with the same title. We do this occasionally when there are two threads on the same subject, to avoid splitting and confusing the discussion. Upon request from Shambles, I reopened the thread. I also combined the newer thread with the older one. Shambles, if this is the thread you are referring to, please be sure not to mislead the nice people. Be sure to tell them that this took place in April or May, that it was closed because there was another thread active on the same subject, and that the thread was reopened at your request within a few days. You might even provide a link to the threads you're talking about, so people will understand. But what's the sense in continuing to argue about the closing of a thread when that action was reversed three months ago?

Oh, you have continually challenged my "This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say" statement, and have even pointed it out to be a lie. Well, Roger, you are allowed one "complaint" thread at a time. As long as you kept your complaints in that one thread, that thread was kept open. Once you started posting your complaints in another thread, the earlier thread was closed. That's the breaks. Most people naturally confine their remarks on a subject to the current discussion on that topic. Over a period of a number of years, you continually posted the same information over a number of threads, all at the same time - so very moderate measures were taken to compel you to act as others do naturally. Let me repeat: no attempt has been made to control the content of your posts, but we have had to channel your remarks into a single thread, instead of continuing to allow you to post the very same thing in a number of threads at the same time. It's your constant repetition that's the problem, Roger, not the content of your posts.

I usually try to answer all questions the first time they're asked. When the same person asks the same question over and over again, I don't bother answering. These unanswered questions do tend to make it appear that I'm withholding information, but that's not the case. It does, however, make it very difficult for the rest of us to carry on a reasonable, productive discussion of Mudcat editing. The volunteers and I would very much like to serve the needs and wishes of this community, but not the petty paranoia of one individual.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 06:32 PM

"Subject: RE: Review: The Dubliners - What's the big deal?
From: GUEST,Porn - PM
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 06:33 AM"

Hey Joe, why you leaving this crap on the 'cat? Wake up there, son. Jaysus, what the hell kinda site administrator ARE you?


LOLOLOLOLOL


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ?
From: GUEST,depressed
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:32 PM

well... who the f*** cares anyway..?

sod it!


its all a waste of time and no one gives a monkeys anyway..



bollocks..!!!!



wheres my anti depressant tablets...?


f** it must have got confused and swallowed them all in one go


teatime last night.....


thats a nice hit thatd felod ew\inh fom te..zdsjsddddddddddddd

im ok dont wh\nt to gerthospirtlized and sexcrineed

cusx inm ok realy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:54 PM

canty remeber f i took my tablet

and i dont care if i take too

curz no no else fier cares

so why skiould i

i dont givegurt momnkeys


fudki t if i live or die


useless s pile of bolloks it is


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ?
From: Peace
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM

This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:02 AM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: mudchat, why is there never anyone there
From: GUEST,depressed
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:16 AM

because the sad fucking loser wankers who hold power over life and death..

[in their own sad loser immagination]

stifle creativity and expression here

with the pathetic little delete button they command..


sad fucks they are


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,depred
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:17 AM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,depressed
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:19 AM

sad twats with delete buttons...

fuck you


you useless shite pellet


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 02:43 AM

Well, I think we have a tendency to respond by counterattacking large populations of people who have nothing to do with terrorism. I think that our responses to terrorism have been misdirected and ineffective, and have only served to make a bad situation worse by destroying any sympathy the world had for us.
So, yeah, I think we need to re-think things - to respond, but to respond judiciously.
-Joe Offer-


This not to make any judgement about the relative importance of two totally different issues. But I do think the criticism and the suggested approach has some relevance for this issue - if the word 'terrorism' in the above was substituted for words like ' abusive personal attacks' - 'flaming' - trolling' - spamming etc.

Generally the measures taken to try and deal with the (thankfully still rare) extreme terrorist actions - mostly affect and restrict the daily lives of ordinary people. As we can see currently, where thankfully there has been no loss of life. But the publicity and disruption caused by the new additional restrictions - on top of the ones already in place - for ordinary air-travellers, have had the effect disired by the terrorists anyway.

I have requested a few things here. Most of them have not been accepted. I did NOT request that all recently deleted threads be placed in this one. But now the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has decided to do this - no doubt the blame for this will be shifted to me. When posters complain that the inclusion of such posts have offended and corrupted them............

But their appearance unbidden in this thread does not seem to have made the the whole Mudcat world crumble.

So perhaps these posts can safely be left where they are posted and all the restrictions, secrecy and division that is justified to deal with such things - can be seen to be disproportionate and re-thought?


Part of the reason for the request that all imposed censorship actions be recorded was in the hope that this would result in less imposed censorship actions. Especially as the automatic way of dealing with any perceived problems. And that an attempt could then be made to find less drastic solutions and a return to all of our 'moderators' (and posters) setting a better example of posting behaviour and leading by this example.

And that those posters who are currently encouraged by the example set - to only post to make personal judgements about the worth of their fellow posters and complain about what others chose to post - can be told to mind their own business and to concentrate on their own posts - by our (few remaining) known and still credible 'moderators'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 02:54 AM

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-


If you can't stand the heat - no one is forcing you to stay in the kitchen and feel that when you get hot and bothered you have some right to throw pots and pans at the customers.

Give us a break - we ordinary posters don't get paid to do this either, 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.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 03:14 AM

Roger, most of this stuff was deleted because somebody asked us to delete it - although it all would have all been deleted sooner or later. It seems that if Internet forums allow Spam to be posted, it gets posted in increasing quantities. I don't know why, but that's what seems to happen.

I moved the deleted messages from the last few days to this thread, so that people can see that we're telling the truth - that the messages we delete are just plain garbarge, and that such deletions should require no explanation or justification.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 05:25 AM

Unfortunately Joe, while you can provide pretty convincing evidence that Mudcat gets spam, you can not prove that you have not been selective in what you are showing the forum. Also, under the current system, even if for example the previous post was edited manually, you will still not be able to proove that this has occured for every deletion.

Don't get me wrong, I don't need convincing. I'm just commenting that whatever you do, at least under the current system, you could still be just as subject to "us not knowing the true level of censorship in our forum" as you are now. The only way that should remove that sort of doubt is system that automatically took an action,

eg. assuming the "deleted messages" are hidden but remain connected to the thread, it's unlikely to be to difficult to show "message deleted" instead of the posts content for messages marked as deleted.

That type of thing though is something I know you can not do yourself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 06:30 AM

Roger, most of this stuff was deleted because somebody asked us to delete it - although it all would have all been deleted sooner or later.

So these somebodies are not going to be very happy now you have decided to place it all here for whatever reason you decided to.

Our forum does know what spam is and what other things are out there - without this demonstration. And again you use the method of demonstrating the sort of obviously questionable posts that few poster miss much and would judge harshly - to confuse this with the heavy-handed methods used to ensure it does not appear.

The point is that these as the very same methods that are automatically imposed on far less questionable posts. 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 and often for the slightest of reasons.....

And as you know my main concern is when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Forum's excitement leads him to propose to Max that the only way that he can impose the 'peace' that he requires - is for our forum to be changed into a members only forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 07:01 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM

[..]
However the question is less why this could not be done as why the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not WANT to do it.

For I am quite sure that IF he did want to do this - or indeed anything else - it would be done - whatever its effect and whether you or I liked it or not.

-------
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 06:30 AM

[..]

And as you know my main concern is when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Forum's excitement leads him to propose to Max...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 07:04 AM

Oh, you have continually challenged my "This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say" statement, and have even pointed it out to be a lie. Well, Roger, you are allowed one "complaint" thread at a time. As long as you kept your complaints in that one thread, that thread was kept open. Once you started posting your complaints in another thread, the earlier thread was closed. That's the breaks.

The above explanation (for moving the goalposts) may have been an acceptable one - had the assurance you given by the Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team, to our forum in that editing comment - This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say as long as he does not say anything in any other thread at any other time..

Perhaps you would confim that the assurance given was only? This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say. And that his assurance that that thread was not going to be closed - is perfectly clear?

For there was no mention of the word 'complaint' in this assurance or any other qualification made in it - was there?

And as you admit to responding to complaints from (some) other posters to justify some of your editing - your view on the desirabilty or otherwise of 'complaints' seems to depend on what they are about and who may making them.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team obviously does not feel that he has to honour his assurances, given in editing comments and can change his mind at any time and attempt to justify this.....

Any future assurances grandly presented for public consumption by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team must be seen in the same light - to mean very little.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:59 PM

I did suggest that an excuse to close this thread and prevent debate on this issue would be found. The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team placing in this thread of all these deleted posts - will of course provide that excuse.

Please delete spam

The above thread indicate the sort of silly games that this are now being encouraged to be played in the Mudcat Help and Trouble Forum. Perhaps the only posts encouraged there should be those requesting action to be taken on their own posts?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM

Subject: RE: Please Delete Spam
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12-Aug-06 - 01:48 PM

It helps if you give us both the name and the number of the thread, and preferable the specific message number. All I find at this address is another boring Shambles thread.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 02:00 PM

Well, whatever.
Anyhow, my reason for moving the deleted posts here is to show people what it is that we delete. No, I suppose I can't prove that there are others I haven't revealed. You have to take my word for it. But that's it - all our deleted posts from the days since Shambles started this thread.

I won't bother moving any more here - you get the point.

It doesn't help to argue with Shambles, because he just says what I have to say is untrue. I've done my best to be honest, but Shambles calls me a liar. So, I guess I have nothing more to say.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 03:01 PM

I won't bother moving any more here - you get the point.
Joe Offer


I still am not sure what the point was (we do already know what spam is).

It was not what I reqested you to do was it? Perhaps you will now do this?

And perhaps you will now remove from this thread all the posts you placed here?

I can't help but wonder what excitement would have been caused, judgements made and witch-hunts started - had anyone else but the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team attempted such a thing?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 03:12 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 01:31 AM

The concern is NOT the bathwater being thrown out.

The concern is what may be getting thrown-out with it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 01:52 AM

Shambles, for years you have been making empty and untruthful allegations about Mudcat editors basing message deletion on favoritism and personal likes and dislikes. I thought it was time to give some solid evidence, so people can see the typical messages we delete - and so they can understand why there should be no need for explanation or notation of these deletions.

I present these messages as evidence. Surely, my evidence has as much a place in this thread as unsubstantiated allegations from Shambles. There is no baby being thrown out with the bathwater, although Shambles has done his best to mislead people into suspecting that there may be something devious about our editing practices.

These are the messages that would usually be deleted in a typical three-day period at Mudcat. I think I found all of them. Shambles, if you wish to allege that there were other messages deleted during this period, prove it. I think you've slandered the Mudcat volunteers long enough.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 12:38 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Raedwulf
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 04:14 PM

"Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team"

Roger, stop being so goddamned childish. His name is Joe. Every knows it. What stupid point do you think you're making by referring to him third person neutral? You've been talking to him for years. What is this? Some new tactic (*gasp* after all these years, an original twist on the same lame old bad joke...) to de-humanise him & garner some sympathy for yourself? I promise you it's not working. Grow up, man!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 04:17 PM

"What stupid point do you think you're making by referring to him third person neutral?"

It's passive-aggressive baiting.... From a small minded little troll who hasn't got the grapes to come out and flame the person he's angry with, so hides behind a facade of being polite....

When he's proved over and over and over that he's anything BUT polite....

He'll now come here and claim to have been infairly attacked.... When, in fact, he's made his bed, and is now being told to lay in it


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:41 PM

It sure doesn't take long for innocent threads to be deleted here. I started one asking the innocent question of whether Shambles has been evicted from the Mudcat. There was nothing nasty and I even praised him. Within 10 minutes at the most it was gone. Maybe Shambles has a point here. That certainly was overzealous editing. I wonder how long it will take for this to be gone forever.

I never thought that I would say it but Shambles...YOU ARE RIGHT. Continue fighting my man.
    That's right - we generally don't allow threads that are directed at individual Mudcatters, so I deleted that thread as soon as I saw it. That one was sure to become a personal attack by the fourth message.

    Here's the introductory message:
      Subject: BS: Has Shambles Been Evicted? From: GUEST
      Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM

      I hear a strange quietness across the Mudcat land. Can it be that Mr. Shambles has rambled on to bigger and better places? I hope that he finds a cause worthy of his persistence.
    Seems to me that a thread like that is sure to cause trouble.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:45 PM

I applaud Mudcat for taking that post down. I read that post. People complain about Shambles and your post was not "innocent", it was an attempt to stir up crap.   Shame on you! I hope that someone will remove more message. I don't mind if this one is removed either!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:50 PM

Ron,

It really wasn't an attempt to stir up trouble. It is not like Shambles to be gone for two days. I was simply curious as to whether he was blocked from posting. Certainly nothing bad was said in the posting.

Fred


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:53 PM

Okay, that is your story.   You did note a change in the tone of this place and I read it differently then what you are claiming.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 03:02 PM

There is a change in the tone of the place much like there was when Martin Gibson left. It was just noted but not commented on. No nastiness or gloating or snide comments. Strictly factual. I did not feel that there was any cause in that for deletion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 03:11 PM

I think Mudcat did the right thing, and they do not need to justify their actions either for that matter.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 03:16 PM

I am not asking for them to justify their actions. I am simply disagreeing with them and you on the necessity of it being done.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 03:20 PM

Noted. I agree with their decision.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 05:25 PM

This is about to get very confusing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 06:16 PM

Yeah let's play Guess which Guest is the Guest that said "This is about to get very confusing."

Let the game begin...

Question 1:   Guest#1 who is Guest #2
Question 2:   Guest#2 who is Guest #3
Question 3:   Who was the Guest that once said "I couldn't care less what you think" ~{hint does the year 2001 ring any bells?]

There you have it folks, 'CONFUSION' the family Game where any Guest is welcome to play.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 06:23 PM

WHOGABRA?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 08:32 PM

Who gives a big rat's ass.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:15 PM

Well played, Bruce.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:18 PM

I had to use the internet for that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:22 PM

It's something I got from my father. A wise man, my father.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:24 PM

Well, he's coined a thingy (acronym(sp?).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:39 PM

Peace (and anybody else, for that matter) please check out this
thread.

Jeff


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 11:58 AM

Shambles, for years you have been making empty and untruthful allegations about Mudcat editors basing message deletion on favoritism and personal likes and dislikes.

No......... I have povided evidence - mostly in the words used by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, (some of) his known and anonymous volunteers to justifiy their imposed actions. Perhaps our forum will judge who is is that has been making personally motivated allegations and assumptions - as yet more of these are being made by you in this thread to gain more support for your witch-hunt and for the special posting restrictions taht apply only to me.......

I thought it was time to give some solid evidence, so people can see the typical messages we delete - and so they can understand why there should be no need for explanation or notation of these deletions.

Your decision to litter this thread with spam has served no other purpose than to demonstrate that you will simply choose to as you wish and that the whole fabric of our forum will not crumble if posts such as these, were simply left alone.

I present these messages as evidence. Surely, my evidence has as much a place in this thread as unsubstantiated allegations from Shambles. There is no baby being thrown out with the bathwater, although Shambles has done his best to mislead people into suspecting that there may be something devious about our editing practices.

Our forum does not need any evidence provided to demonstrate what spam is. And as Jon has already pointed out - there is no evidence provided here to demonstrate your claim to our forum - that nothing is being thrown-out with this bathwater.

These are the messages that would usually be deleted in a typical three-day period at Mudcat. I think I found all of them. Shambles, if you wish to allege that there were other messages deleted during this period, prove it. I think you've slandered the Mudcat volunteers long enough.

Like any other ordinary poster- I am in no position to express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of all the forms of imposed censorship on our forum. I do know what it is for my posts and that is why the request is being made that all such impostions are recorded with the editing comments that litter my posts and for all posters to be seen to be treated equally.

Then all posters will be seen to be protected from any personally motivated and selective imposition (and from posts containing 'empty and untruthful allegations' like this one from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team).

And if their services are still required - all known and anonymous 'Mudcat volunteers' will be protected from any allegations that any of their imposed actions were personally biased.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM

Shambles says:
I am in no position to express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of all the forms of imposed censorship on our forum.

that has been evident for some time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:11 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:39 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment (in bold) as in was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh this thread.

The imposed censorship action referred to occured after the period selected by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to show all of his 'silent deletions' in this thread. You may judge this thread to have been 'bathwater' and have deserved such censorship to be imposed, in your name and in order to avoid 'trouble'. Then again you may not?

But without the poster bringing this censorship to the attention of this thread - you would have never been able to make this judgement for yourself - as it has already been made for you.   

That's right - we generally don't allow threads that are directed at individual Mudcatters, so I deleted that thread as soon as I saw it. That one was sure to become a personal attack by the fourth message.

Here's the introductory message:
Subject: BS: Has Shambles Been Evicted? From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM

I hear a strange quietness across the Mudcat land. Can it be that Mr. Shambles has rambled on to bigger and better places? I hope that he finds a cause worthy of his persistence.


Seems to me that a thread like that is sure to cause trouble.
-Joe Offer-


Strange then that a thread titled   Shambles still here and why?   was not so judged and only suffered an imposed title change - before finally being subject to imposed closure by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. But then he will do as he likes and justfy it later as being 'Mudcat' policy - even when it may be the very opposite of what he judged to be 'Mudcat policy' last week.

The following examples of acceptable posting - from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are not judged (by him) to be 'trouble' or to be personally motivated.

Dunno, Roger. As I see it, I sometimes disagree with people, but I'm not combative. It's the combative stuff that causes trouble at Mudcat. and I do believe that needs to be controlled.
Joe Offer


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



If such posting behaviour is judged as needing to be controlled (by the one posting it) - perhaps as start could be made by a change to a new Chief of the Mudcat Editing team who would be prepared to set a better example?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

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


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into a spam post that was itself inserted and which now forms the first post in this thread.

Sample of a typical deleted message, moved here for demonstration purposes. I moved all of the messages from August 10-12 into this thread, so people can see just what we've been deleting.
-Joe Offer-


Perhaps for a little bit of balance - a few examples of the sort of posts that 'we' have not been deleting? And the sort of personal judgements posts which some may consider that are actually being encouraged............

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Sorcha - PM
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 08:05 PM

ROGER! Shut the FUCK up and GO AWAY!



Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: katlaughing - PM
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM

PLEASE CLOSE THIS USELESS THREAD!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM

You're still setting a bad example...
It still isn't working....

So why continue?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 12:49 PM

I've done my best to be honest, but Shambles calls me a liar. So, I guess I have nothing more to say.
-Joe Offer-


Well, despite this assurance - you did go on to say more. But perhaps this was only to be expected.

In my book - someone judged to be a liar includes one who does see any reason why they should honour their public assurances. The facts have demonstrated that you feel you can ignore any assurance given to our forum in an editing comment here by simply changing your mind. You must accept the consequences of that action and not make the usual attempt to minimise, justify and defend these actions and make this attempt under the usual double standard of behaviour. An attempt which discredits all of the honest efforts made here and makes The Mudcat Cafe look hypocritical.

Despite your groundless accusations over my reactions to your conduct, you have been shown to be a man whose word cannot be trusted.

And yet you still expect posters to trust your word when you clearly do not trust anyone else's. And you consider it unfair if you are judged when you feel qualified to impose your judgement on others and do not consider this to be at all unfair.   

You feel that you can constantly give posters cause for complaint but then have some right to insult them if they should do this. You do not seem to have noticed that in fact I have long-ago ceased to officially complain. As it is clear there is little point in such a course.

I attempt to try and post my views to inform our forum of the true nature and current level of censorship - to enable this to be discussed. And I will continue to make this attempt - despite the efforts of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to prevent and restrict this.

And yes I do expect those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on me to set a better example than the example set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and will work towards ensuring that a better example will be shown in future.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 12:57 PM

??????

The Shambles says:"You do not seem to have noticed that in fact I have long-ago ceased to officially complain"

When did this occur? seems to be a few complaints in your current post, which makes that statement inaccurate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:07 PM

What stupid point do you think you're making by referring to him third person neutral.

A simple one that is often overlooked. That the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is only a role that is currently occupied by the fellow poster called Joe Offer.

That when for example Joe Offer states in post that he does not like Birthday threads - (or any of the number of things that are not to his personal taste) - that this is only a personal view and just as valid as any other poster's personal view. And no more so.

But when in his role as current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - he give an assurance to our forum in an editing comment - that he does not honour - the excuse provided for this - is not just a personal view but an official one which brings into question his suitability to continue in this role. And perhaps question the need for such a role to continue at all?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:19 PM

" In my book"
Your book doesn't matter squirt on Mudcat......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:22 PM

One difference between you and me, the Sham, is that I don't consider that I need a role model. The fact that you do may account for the aggrievement you feel.

I consider myself responsible for myself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:23 PM

200 wasted posts


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:27 PM

Do you still claim that you do not wish to tell max how to run his site? Because you do so frequently.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:35 PM

200

The devil made me do it.
    Damn. Mudcat (or my ISP) is so slow today that Giok beat me to it. This is post #202.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM

I would shoot that devil if I were you Joe, her can't count.
Too many birthday drinks?
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:53 PM

Joe Offer Vs Birth Day Threads

The fact that you do may account for the aggrievement you feel.

Not sure that I do need a role model but if I did - it would not the example of acceptable posting behaviour currently set for our forum to follow - of do as I say - not as I do.

I think that the setting, justifying and defending of such an example may now account for quite a lot of aggrievement on our forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:02 PM

If only self righteousness and smugness were a terminal condition. At least then we could see an end to Roger's wittering.
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:17 PM

Non sequitur alert: what does my birthday have to do with Mudcat editing?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM

Just because it's irrelevant doesn't mean Roger won't drag it into his whinge.
G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:24 PM

Actually Giok, if you could die of assholism, Shambotinkles would have croaked long ago. If sheer idiocy caused a rash, he'd be scratching himself silly all over his body instead of just his nuts as he normally does. And if hypocrisy and lies were sugar and pies he'd weigh in at about a ton.

Three months ago Max asked you to leave here Shammypammy. Plain English....No bull, very direct. You talk of other's honor Shambotubbly? You have none, nada, zilch, morally bankrupt.

Up yours and have a nice day........I just did!!!!!!!)

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:27 PM

well - Joe - you have publicly stated your dis-like of multitudinous b-day threads. I think that was as "Joe Offer, fellow poster"; though I seem to recall that it was also stated as that other role you fill. But b-day threads continue. Whereas, god forbid, should conditions change and anything you have said as "Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team' no longer be valid - or an exception be made...

well - obviously....err

I dunno. What does it have to do with mudcat editing?

Is this a trick question? Is it the difference between "if you have anything to say you may start new threads" and "if you have anything new to say you may start new threads". Is it about the difference between crossing the road and cross a grape?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 04:59 PM

I think that it means that supposedly, I am not allowed to have likes and dislikes. If I like something or dislike something, then I suppose the logic is that I will act according to my likes and dislikes.
I think the worst thing I ever did to a birthday thread is grumble about it. Is that so horrible?
Who makes these rules, anyhow?
-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 05:13 PM

Joe - do your likes and dislikes remain the same when you change from "Joe Offer" { mild mannered moderator for a great international website } and when you turn into the "Current Chief of the Mudcat editing team" ? And does the change require a cape? Because your secret identity has been blown.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 06:46 PM

Gee...Shambles better hope "Mild-mannered, but sometimes opinionated Joe Offer" doesn't get replaced by a "neutral" program set to delete repetitious nonsense and non-sequiturs. Joe at least TRIES to make allowances for idiosyncratic aberrations...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 11:22 PM

"idiosyncratic aberrations..."

Should this kind of language be posted where children might see it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:40 AM

I think the worst thing I ever did to a birthday thread is grumble about it. Is that so horrible?

Probably not - if you judge the role of a 'moderator' to inhibit posting.

If you judge that the role of a 'moderator' simply to enable and encourage posting - it probably is.

If the list of things that have been inhibited by this public 'grumbling' - only consisted of birthday threads it may not be too horrible. But the list is a long and continuing one.

If you wish to be free to grumble - like any ordinary poster - please don't hesitate to become one of us again..........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:47 AM

Non sequitur alert: what does my birthday have to do with Mudcat editing?

As it was one of your great supporters who first introduced the subject to this thread - why not ask him?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM

I would shoot that devil if I were you Joe, her can't count.
Too many birthday drinks?
Giok


And then goes on to blame me.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM

Just because it's irrelevant doesn't mean Roger won't drag it into his whinge.
G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:54 AM

Hee hee!!!
Nice to see the old paranoia is still ruling your mind Roger.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:55 AM

Shambles, your persecutory delusions are worsening.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 03:16 PM

Who makes these rules, anyhow?
-Joe-


Well it would appear to be the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who tells us what he will or will not allow others to post, what will or will not happen and what suggestions are accepted or not.

Or it could just be my fellow poster Joe Offer just expressing and acting on his personal likes and dislikes..............


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM

"personal likes and dislikes.............."

A personal dislike of mine is a string of periods at the end of what would have been a sentence had it had four periods. In this case, the ellipsis would be followed by the period or end punctuation point. Sorry to quibble so. Slow day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:30 PM

Ahh, got my 'puter back. Just in time to remind this guy that the owner invited him to leave. Just go, Sham.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:50 PM

Sorry Peace.
.........etc.

Oh give over and just GO Shambles.
No, nobody here loves you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:55 PM

how about dashes Peace ------- would that make it easier ----------?

sIx


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:57 PM

As long as there isn't a hundred yards of them. I never did like that either. The mile was OK, but not the sprint.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 11:26 PM

"idiosyncratic aberrations..."

yeah, like 'public gesticulation'...(The children know MUCH worse!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 11:28 PM

My gawd!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 05:59 AM

You called my son?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 06:11 AM

He called your son what?

:D (tG)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 06:25 AM

I hope he calls him Ewan, after all that's what I call him.
G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 07:53 PM

Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ?
From: Peace - PM
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM

This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!


The above post was deleted and then copied and pasted into this thread by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team (for strange reasons of his own). Anyone want to try and explain why the following post was NOT judged suitable for deletion?


    For the record: the message above was moved, not deleted and copy-pasted - but that's neither here nor there, I suppose. The message below was not deleted because "Roger" does not like to see posts deleted, and this post was about him. We really don't know what to do with posts when they're about "Roger" - he complains if we leave them, and he complains if we delete them. Attacks on "Roger" are deleted when it appears that they may disturb the peace of the entire forum. Is it actually an "attack" to tell an exceedingly verbose person to shut up?? I dunno.
    -Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Sorcha - PM
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 08:05 PM

ROGER! Shut the FUCK up and GO AWAY!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 07:59 PM

Oh, sure...because you haven't yet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:09 PM

"Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ?
From: Peace - PM
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM

This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!"

Roger. That post was deleted for whatever reasons the person saw fit. It was my response (I think the second post) to a troll who was saying he was depressed and implying that he was going to kill himself and shit like that. However, he'd started two or three threads (or written to two or three) and called everyone with an edit button some sort of bad person.

I think that the whole thread got deleted.

I don't doubt that there may be a clone who is trigger happy, and with regard to me I can name that person. However, piss on it. Life's too short. That person will croak before me, and that'll have to do.

Please don't use me as the example for the things you are pursuing. If I get pissed about one of my posts getting the axe, I will inform Joe myself. No offense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:30 PM

"Subject: ivtqgce xsvauheyc
From: GUEST,scwemjid uhqsjn - PM
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:25 PM

pikesqr zqcga hqbkz izsfpv psmtonihv zgrmxie chqnbayx"

I think I know what these posts are about. Does anyone recall in the old Superman comics that there was some sorta 'bad-news magical creature' that could only be sent back to its dimension by being tricked into saying its name backwards?

(NO applause necessary--it's a gift, but thanks for the thought.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: JennyO
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:30 PM

So the guest's name was njsqhu dijmewcs then? Wow! You might be onto something.

Well it makes as much sense as anything else around here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:31 PM

Mr. Mptzxtlplx...or something like that....(I think he was copied from "Joe Bzftzlpk" in Lil' Abner....who always had a rain cloud following him)

(Now, *I* will accept applause)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:37 PM

For YOU, Bill.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 01:16 AM

Just lost the long post I wrote. Ratsafrazzle! My fault, wrong button.

Anyway, Mxyzptlk and Btfsplk appeared in the mid'40's so they may just have been great ideas of two genius cartoonists. One was a villain from the fifth dimension who ripped Superman a new one until the Man of Steel could trick him into saying his name backwards.

Joe was the ultimate jinx and the harbinger of all the bad luck there was to be had.

Mr.Srbpjqakxw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:25 AM

"This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!"

At least he said please Roger, it's nice to see good manners like that, it's so rare these days.
Giok ¦¬]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Bewildered Dingo
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 10:52 AM

Can some of you that continue to reply to Mr. Shambles explain why you keep doing so? You are giving him just what he is seeking; validation that his repetition is warranted.

If he is bad then you just might be worse, because you are perpetuating this nonsense and more at fault than he is. Some of you repeat the very same thing over and over and over...just as he does.

You are like a pack of wild dogs that jump a wounded pack member and tear him apart even though he is down and defenseless.

Please reassess what you are doing here. You are losing respect of some of your fellow members, if that matters to you.

Mr. Shambles, in the words of a song: "sometimes you just can't win" You have lost this argument even from those of us that might agree with some of your gripes. Please call it a day on this subject then try to regain the respect of fellow members by posting the useful type of messages you are capable of in the music section.

Dingo not hungry for blood


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 06:10 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing thread (in very small writing) and did not refresh the thread.

For the record: the message above was moved, not deleted and copy-pasted - but that's neither here nor there, I suppose. The message below was not deleted because "Roger" does not like to see posts deleted, and this post was about him. We really don't know what to do with posts when they're about "Roger" - he complains if we leave them, and he complains if we delete them. Attacks on "Roger" are deleted when it appears that they may disturb the peace of the entire forum. Is it actually an "attack" to tell an exceedingly verbose person to shut up?? I dunno.
-Joe Offer-


As the whole point of the introduction of the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, his known and anonymous volunteer 'moderators' is said to be to protect us from abusive personal attacks - the fact that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not seem to consider that a post addressed to an individual telling them to shut the f*** up and go away, to be an attack - suggests strongly that it is now time for a change? Especially as this post is only following the example set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, that such posts are now acceptable posting behaviour on our forum?   

Few posters have the ability (or desire) to 'move' the posts of others and also cannot insert their personal opinions into the posts of others and attempt to disguise these as an 'editing comment'.

As for 'we' not knowing what to do when posts are about any individual poster - the simple answer as in all this - is the same.

What is requested is for equal treatment to be seen to be applied to all posters. When all is conducted fairly and openly - all parties are seen to be protected.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 05:05 PM

Is there any chance of anyone attempting to answer the following?

Would you judge that editing comments, belong and make sense ONLY where they are inserted into my posts?

If censorship must take place - why do you consider that it does not then make sense to place all editing comments where they belong?

[This where any form of imposed action has been judged to be required and to enable all poster to make an informed judgement on the true nature and level of censorship on our forum.]

Why would you consider one to be good idea and the other to be bad one?

Because this double standard is what the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is expecting (and appears to be receiving) your support in.............


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 05:25 PM

You may have missed the following comment Roger, it was inserted in a post by Max Spiegel, the guy who owns this site.

'Perhaps it's time you went Shambles'

Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 06:15 PM

I like the way Joe does his comments, even when they are directed at me. He writes in that neat rust-coloured red and uses excellent grammar and punctuation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 06:16 PM

For those that may have missed it - or those that wish to put their own words into the mouth of this site's owner - this is what was said.

Subject: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Max - PM
Date: 11 May 06 - 10:43 PM

I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.

Martin Gibson: you have to pack up and go. Your knowledge and contributions are valuable, and it's a shame that your sociopathy prevents us from hosting you or taking you seriously anymore.

Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

Joe: Do I need to separate you two?
>snip<


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Sorcha
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 06:20 PM

Shut UP and LEAVE Shambles. Nobody cares anymore. Start your OWN site and maintain it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 07:49 PM

Apparently talcum powder is good for creaking boards.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 08:10 PM

Monothematic delusions

When some one is delusional, they will interpret all imput as confirming the delusional belief.

Methinks he ain't being stubborn and he really can't help himself.

He can't give it up. Presumably those of us who repeatedly respond or react can. So why don't we. It would be a kindness.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John O'L
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 10:02 PM

He can't give it up. Presumably those of us who repeatedly respond or react can. So why don't we.

Interesting that I should be sufficiently bored to check this thread just after someone has said exactly what I said so long ago.

It will never happen. You all suffer from the same affliction. This thread is like a bar for inebriates only. Well I've had my shot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 04:29 AM

Well, yes, Shambles, I did refer to you as a buffoon.
Joe Offer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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-


Not too sure what is so delusional here?

Are there not special restrictions imposed on my postings announced and defended by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

Is the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team seen to pay little regard to any assurances given to our forum in editing comments?

Does the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team still insist on setting the example that posts containing only abusive personal attacks, name-calling and judgements of the worth of fellow posters is now acceptable on our forum?

Should I then ignore this?

I suggest that to do so - or to urge others to do so - would be the course that is truly delusional.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 05:07 AM

Please don't use me as the example for the things you are pursuing. If I get pissed about one of my posts getting the axe, I will inform Joe myself. No offense.

It was not me who used your post as an example was it - so perhaps your request would be better addressed to those who did? No offence.

Had the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team not 'silently deleted' your post and then 'moved' it to this thread - for reasons of his own - I and our forum would not have known that your post even existed.

Had you (or any other poster) been pissed about such an action - you would not have gotten very far. First you would have had to try and prove that it (and not similar but remaining posts) was subject to imposed censorship.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 05:12 AM

Of course posts are subject to imposed censorship, get used to it Roger.
Pro bono publico is the term you will find fits the situation.
G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 11:47 AM

[PM] Max The future of Mudcat. What do YOU think? (81* d) RE: The future of Mudcat. What do YOU think? 12 Jan 00

Censorship will not happen. I do admit to deleting something here or there, but the ONLY two ways that will happen is if personal or delicate information is mistakenly posted and either I see it or the SUBJECT or POSTER requests that I remove it. The second way is if I feel like it (This is half a joke, the temptation as "The Man" to remove downright garbage is just too tempting sometimes, and I do reserve the ability for EXTREME situations, ex. Telling one to go ahead and do it in a suicide thread.)
Max


What is simply being requested now is that if censorship is judged to be required in order to protect us - that an editing comment is always inserted to indicate where and when it is imposed and a very brief reason provided.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 12:09 PM

The computer says No!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 12:21 PM

What is simply being requested now is that if censorship is judged to be required in order to protect us - that an editing comment is always inserted to indicate where and when it is imposed and a very brief reason provided.

And each time, shortly after that action we would read a post by you starting

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing thread and did not refresh the thread.... ?

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 12:49 PM

I know what I'd like to insert, and where, and I'm absolutely sure he'd notice it; them pineapples hurt!
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 12:53 PM

Sorry Giok, you can't do that. It is quite simply too much. What I mean is that with his head so far up his ass he has to take his hat off to shit, there is no room for anything else!

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 01:44 PM

You people that continue to respond to Shambles are the real fools and worse than he.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 01:54 PM

Oh how smug it is to be a guest!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM

"Oh wad the gift the guestie gie us,
To show himself, as well as be us."

anyone want to polish that last line, be my....uhh...guest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:48 PM

Oh wad some powr the giftie gie us
Tae see oorsels, as ithers see us.
G


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:52 PM

Good 'un, Bill.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:30 PM

no, no, Giok..I know the original *grin*...I was trying to be topical.

(why, thank you, Ebbie...you were always a discerning sort!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:31 PM

on 2nd thought, Giok, the original fits too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:41 PM

I thought so too Bill


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 09:00 PM

And each time, shortly after that action we would read a post by you starting

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing thread and did not refresh the thread.... ?
Wolfgang


The reason why I have requested that editing comments are not inserted into my posts (and not accepted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team) is because it was a way open, to the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, to express his personal likes and dislikes under the cover of it being an editing comment - and not to refresh the thread.

And in fact it could be further judged that the abuse of this whole process was the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team being also able to make a value judgement on the worth of the thread - by being seen not to refresh it.   

Perhaps when all imposed censorship actions are recorded - there is a way that a (real) editing comment can be made to refresh the thread? Or perhaps when one is inserted into a post - another post stating that an editing comment has been inserted, can be made, one that will refresh the thread?

What is so wrong with being open in this? If a comment on the threads subject is made by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - why should this comment not refresh the thread, exactly like the comments of ordinary posters do?

If the current attempt to abuse the practice of editing comments and to hide them by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team were to cease - I would have no need to bring our forum's attention to them in my posts. And posters would then be able to judge for themselves if the imposed censorship action undertaken in their name, was appropriate or being abused.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 09:26 PM

If a comment on the threads subject is made by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - why should this comment not refresh the thread, exactly like the comments of ordinary posters do?

Because the main forum thread list here is ordered by the date of the last post to each thread. There is no process called "refresh" that brings a thread up to the top, a thread just goes there when it contains the most recent post.
    Oh, he knows HOW it works, Jon - he just doesn't think I should be permitted to do that. There are times I feel a need to correct misinformation Shambles has presented - and I think it's best to put the correction right next to the misinformation. Besides, I certainly don't want to prolong the life of a Shamblesthread with my response. If Shambles wants his threads refreshed, he can jolly well do it himself. I'm not about to help him. If it is an answer to a question or correction of misinformation regarding Mudcat editing, I post it in editorial comments. If it's expression of opinion, I generally post it in a message.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 05:22 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.


Oh, he knows HOW it works, Jon - he just doesn't think I should be permitted to do that.

The point is that our forum may not know how it currently works. When they do, they are in a position to judge whether the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team should be permitted to this and to judge whether it is an abuse or not.

There are times I feel a need to correct misinformation Shambles has presented - and I think it's best to put the correction right next to the misinformation.

To prevent any abuse - I suggest that an editing comment should only be inserted when some form of imposed censorship action has actually taken place. And if any poster wishes to make any comment in a thread they know that a post will always refresh the thread.

Besides, I certainly don't want to prolong the life of a Shamblesthread with my response.

The advice to posters is if you do not wish to prolong the life of a thread - then do not post to it. Perhaps it is not expecting too much that this advice applies also to the posts of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

If Shambles wants his threads refreshed, he can jolly well do it himself. I'm not about to help him. If it is an answer to a question or correction of misinformation regarding Mudcat editing, I post it in editorial comments. If it's expression of opinion, I generally post it in a message.
-Joe Offer-


No comment required.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 05:33 AM

Dig it Shambolina....We all know that YOU can prolong the life of a thread all by yourself.......and you do. Several times this thread has gone dormant for almost 24 hours, especially lately, and you refresh it with bullshit.

Max asked you to leave. Get the fuck out.

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 06:52 AM

The point is that our forum may not know how it currently works. When they do, they are in a position to judge whether the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team should be permitted to this and to judge whether it is an abuse or not.

OK, it is possible that people may not know, although that is a standard way of going about things.

I did make a programming mistake with the original folkinfo code (it was modified Annexe code to work on the faster MySQL database plus a few other changes) that is relevant to what you are asking about. What I did was set the post date in the MySQL database to an "automatic time stamp" type. The effect of this was that an edit on a post updated the post's date/time.

This did not affect the order of the posts in a thread (which there is sorted in the order they got added to the database rather than the alternative, date posted) but it did change what the most recent post was, causing a "refreh".

What I can say from my experience with this error is that refreshing a thread as a result of an edit (which in many cases can be something as simple as fixing broken HTML - I think you will find it happens at MC more than you might realise BTW) is unhelpful and potentialy confusing. I would not have bothered correcting my mistake had it proved to achieve anything useful, I would instead have been pleased with my "accidental discovery".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 07:32 AM

We all know that YOU can prolong the life of a thread all by yourself.......and you do. Several times this thread has gone dormant for almost 24 hours, especially lately, and you refresh it with bullshit.

The advice to posters is if you do not wish to prolong the life of a thread - then do not post to it.

It is a simple system. But not one that appears to be much understood. Perhaps because of the example now being set by (some) of those who feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on their fellow posters - and eagely followed by some posters - that abusive personal attacks and name-calling are now acceptable posting behaviour.

Posting to a thread - only to judge the worth of your fellow posters will only refresh the thread. Unless you are one of the few privileged with an edit button and one of the few who choose to abuse this privilege by both having their cake and eating it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 07:57 AM

Shambles you are a total fraud, this thread had disappeared off the end, of the list, just look at the time on the thread before yours 24 hours and 24 minutes.
YOU are the one who renews these threads, because YOU are the attention seeker, and YOU are the one on the ego trip.
I repeat YOU are a fraud!
I also repeat as Acting Head of the Shambles Stalkers Union, that Max suggested you leave.
So why are you still here?
Because you're an egomaniac with a chip on both shoulders that's why!
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 08:09 AM

with a chip on both shoulders that's why!

Nah, some would say that is well balanced.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Jeri
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 08:37 AM

Giok, he refreshes it because he knows there's someone out there as compulsive as he is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 09:51 AM

It's a love hate thing Jeri, Roger just loves being hated!
G


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 09:55 AM

Actually, Giok, he has his need for attention filled when he baits folks into posting.

I would like to try an experiment. I would like to see if everyone would just ignore him completely for a month, say til 27 September. I would like to see how often he would fish for responses. Might be fun to watch him get desperate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 10:47 AM

Big Mick said "Actually, Giok, he has his need for attention filled when he baits folks into posting."

And Giok, Big Mick, and Spaw are the fools who continue to take the bait and perpetuate this thread. Giok does it frequently and is far worse than Shambles.

Let Shambles post to himself over and over in this thread. Please do not help him keep it going.

Jeri has it right "Giok, he refreshes it because he knows there's someone out there as compulsive as he is" I would add he knows there are fools on this board that will reply to his "fools bait"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 10:56 AM

And now you, faceless one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 10:58 AM

The smug certainty of an anonymous guest is just as predictable as Shambles monotony!
G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Aug 06 - 06:58 AM

Actually, Giok, he has his need for attention filled when he baits folks into posting.

If that were the case - I could be sure that a few posters would always bite, refreshing the thread only to make their personal judgements, instruct others not to and blame their compulsion to do this, all on on me.

However, that is not the case and the purpose of a discussion forum remains to enable and encourage discussion.

Not, as now appears to be the case on our forum - finding (fun) ways to judge, restrict and prevent it and to make these clumsy attempts at control and interferance sound honourable.

Especially - when the most effective option open to all posters - is simply not to open, read or respond to a threads's subject that is not to their taste.


A landed and floundering fish could try and shift the blame for their predicament on the irresistible quality and quantitity of the bait. But if they were only able to resist their weakness and ignore any form of bait - there would not be a predicament for them.

Nor would there be so many (closed) threads on this subject, all with tens of hundreds of posts. Like the following.

Shambles still here and why?
Deleted posts & closed threads
Minister gone –New One - who cares
Title change discussion (moved from another thread)
Is closing threads censorship?
Music posts by Guests to be reviewed
Proposal for members only posting of BS
I may disagree with what you say-
Your favourite Shamblism
Why all the closed threads?
Non posting of judgements week
Do we need to curb the troublemakers
Do you need to be censored
Censorship and Attitude rolled into TWO
I may disagree with what you say-
Your favourite Shamblism
Why all the closed threads?
Non posting of judgements week
Do we need to curb the troublemakers
Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
More Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
Closing threads
In the UK
Cut and pasters creepin' back in
Politics only posters on the cat
A (true) Jelly fish story
Censorship on Mudcat
Max what about Shambles requests
In the UK
Opening threads a debate

This subject is as much a worthy subject for discussion as any other and one that obviously has no shortage of contributors. Perhaps those who post only to judge the subject or only to judge the worth of their fellow posters and feel they have some right to name-call and tell them to **** ***, can just ignore this subject and leave the threads free for those who do wish to discuss all aspects of it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Aug 06 - 08:04 AM

No matter how offensive you may find someone else's views - surely it is a sign only of your weakness to make or support attempts to prevent or restrict those views from being expressed?

In order only to prevent or restrict views that are not offensive but simply views some would simply prefer were not expressed and discussed on our forum - is it at all honourable to be seen to invent justification for this futile attempt to control what other posters choose to post?

If a thread's subject is judged to be 'boring' or 'repetitive' or 'duplication' - is this really enough justification for censorship to be imposed? And to the exessive and obsessional extent that we see displayed here? Surely threads that were so judged by our forum would simply die young through lack of interest?

All moderately expressed views on our forum can be responded to or ignored - why is it now judged that posters should be denied the opportunity to judge for themselves by the overuse and justification of imposed censorship and for such posting 'crimes'?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Aug 06 - 02:29 AM

Is it just sensible to limit the making of inserted editing comments to only where some form of editing action has actually taken place?

Does that in fact define what an inserted editing comment should always and only be?

Does it not follow that all cases where any form of imposed deleting action is judged to be required - supposedly for the good of our forum - that that an editing comment is always supplied in the place of the censored material?

When a change to this will for the first time enable our forum to see the true nature and current level of censorship and to be able to express an informed opinion on whether this action taken in their name - is required by them.

Why is it now judged to be fair - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - to insert editing comments into existing posts, when no form of editing action has taken place (and often against the wishes of the poster) but somehow unfair for all cases of imposed editing action to have an editing comment of explanation?

If there is nothing to hide - why does the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team prefer take a course of action that is not open and as result may lead posters to judge that there is something to hide?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Aug 06 - 01:20 PM

Not posting on a thread

Could it be that penny has finally dropped?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Aug 06 - 12:36 PM

Until our forum is made aware of all intances where 'silent deletion' has been judged to be needed to be imposed, in order to protect us - there will always be some question that current measures may be heavy-handed, personally motivated or generally unfair and open to abuse.

The simple act of limiting all editing comments to where some form of editing action has actually been imposed and always inserting editing comments where any form of censorship has been imposed - will remove any suspicion of abuse.

If such a simple measures toward a more open approach will achieve this and greatly benefit and inform our forum - the question that remain to be answered is why is such a change so strongly resisted and in the manner we see so well demonstrated in this thread?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 06 - 09:02 PM

Are the mods anti-English

The lastest encouragement for the current Chief of the Mudcat editing Team's witch-hunt, is the following - which is extracted from a post in the above thread.

It doesn't do any good to discuss any of this with Shambles. He knows the names of all the moderators, and yet he continues to complain about their anonymity. In a three-day period a week or two ago, I transferred all the messages we usually delete into his "closed and deleted" thread, so he and the rest of the world could see a normal sample of what gets deleted. This demonstration didn't satisy Shambles, and he continues to assert that the Mudcat moderators are silently deleting something or another. I guess I have to expect that Shambles will continue to assert that horrible but nonspecific things are happening in secret. I can't think of how to devise a system that will provide absolute proof that these horrible nonspecific things are NOT being done by Anonymous Fellow Posters. I tried, but he didn't believe me, so it doesn't do any good to discuss anything with him. I guess it's good to just let him continue to believe in these Horrible Nonspecific Things and in his Anonymous Fellow Posters, because it gives meaning and purpose to his life. I do have to limit him to one thread at a time, so the rest of us can actually carry on reasonable discussions. I suppose that since this is "his" topic, this will become "his" thread, and I'll have to close the other one. I'll wait and see what he does.
Joe Offer


For the record - I do not know - nor could I know the 'names of all the moderators'. I do not even know how many there are. And even if it was the case that I did know this - it would not be open knowledge to our forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Sep 06 - 10:04 AM

I do have to limit him to one thread at a time, so the rest of us can actually carry on reasonable discussions

This all sounds very noble and selfless - but can someone explain why my postings (only) should be HAVE to be restricted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team for the reasons stated by him?

It is clear to me how the selective and personally motivated censorship actions, silent deletions and restrictions imposed on my posts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team will prevent reasonable and free discussion on our forum.

It is not at all clear how the posting of my moderately espressed views are preventing any other posters from carrying on with reasonable discussion on our forum.

Perhaps this can be explained?

And if it cannot - perhaps these restrictions can be removed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Sep 06 - 02:14 AM

Are the mods anti-English?

The above is yet another thread to add to the list of closed threads. This one was closed without an editing comment but just a conventional post. Perhaps out of a fear that someone else (who had also posted and threatened to close it) might do it first.....?

Subject: RE: BS: Are the mods Anti-English
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 04 Sep 06 - 12:40 AM

Keith and Divis, as my children say, "chill out!"
...I think that means you're supposed to be civil to each other.
-Joe Offer-

Yeah, I think this thread has run its course. thread closed.

    And this thread is closed, too. We allow only one Shambles-Dominated thread at a time. If we don't control him, Shambles tends to post the same thing in five threads, all at the same time.
    -Joe Offer-

    Reopened per request from Shambles.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Not posting on a thread
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 05:23 AM

Closed threads and deleted posts

And this thread is closed, too. We allow only one Shambles-Dominated thread at a time. If we don't control him, Shambles tends to post the same thing in five threads, all at the same time.
-Joe Offer-


How is this one permitted Shambles Dominated thread to be defined by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?
    As stated above:
      I figure if he starts a complaint thread or posts five complaint messages to a single thread, that's the thread he's chosen to dominate - and all his other complaint posts get moved to that one thread.
    The idea is to allow you to express yourself, but to control the duplication and domination. Say what you want - once. As has been said before, the problem is not the content of your posts, but the endless repetition. This restriction on you applies only to your complaints about Mudcat editing - your messages on this subject are confined to one thread at a time. If you post complaints to one thread today, in general you may not post complaints to any other thread today - you have to wait until tomorrow to post complaints to a new thread. But at your request, I have reopened the "closed and deleted" thread.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 02:36 PM

The only way to test 100% apathy would be to leave it open - or to re-open it.

If indeed it had fallen off the bottom through lack of interest - there would have been no need for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to so quickly subject it to imposed closure and to attempt to make it sound as if it was undertaken for some noble purpose.

Closed threads and deleted posts

And this thread is closed, too. We allow only one Shambles-Dominated thread at a time. If we don't control him, Shambles tends to post the same thing in five threads, all at the same time.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 06:28 PM

As far as I have read on this site, Mr Shambles is quite entitled to start another thread now that his last one has been shut down due to 100% apathy.

100% apathy would have just left it alone.

Someone has made a lot of effort to quickly close it to actively prevent anyone posting to it. I wonder why anyone would be so keen to do this to a thread that posters are supposed to be so apathetic to?

Perhaps the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would be kind enough to re-open Closed threads and deleted posts   and allow our forum to decide for themselves and show how apathetic they may or not be to that thread and this issue.

It is quite clear how the selective and personally motivated censorship actions, silent deletions and restrictions imposed on my posts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team will prevent reasonable and free discussion on our forum. No matter what your opinion of me may be - it should be clear how undesirable this special treatment of any single poster should be.

It is not at all clear how the posting of my moderately espressed views (and mine alone) are preventing any other posters from carrying on with reasonable discussion on our forum. But that is the charge.

Perhaps this can be explained? And if it cannot perhaps these unfair restrictions can be lifted and all posters been seen to be treated equally by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

If the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is not prepared to do this - perhaps our forum might have a new Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who would be willing to be seen to treat all posters equally?
    OK, Roger, your "closed and deleted" thread has been reopened. We'll see what happens. But I'd place the same restrictions on anyone who repeatedly posted multiple copies of the same thing in multiple threads (and sometimes in the same thread). You are still subject to restriction.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 06:58 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post in the above thread and did not refresh it.

As stated above:
I figure if he starts a complaint thread or posts five complaint messages to a single thread, that's the thread he's chosen to dominate - and all his other complaint posts get moved to that one thread.
The idea is to allow you to express yourself, but to control the duplication and domination. Say what you want - once. As has been said before, the problem is not the content of your posts, but the endless repetition. This restriction on you applies only to your complaints about Mudcat editing - your messages on this subject are confined to one thread at a time. If you post complaints to one thread today, in general you may not post complaints to any other thread today - you have to wait until tomorrow to post complaints to a new thread.
-Joe Offer-


How exactly is a complaint about Mudcat editing to be defined and by whom? Is a complaint only a view posted that is not in agreement with the view held by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

It would appear that any view that is agreement with that of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is allowed and encouraged to be repeated many times in many threads and often combined with abusive personal attacks, judgements and name-calling.

Can all these totally unworkable and unfair restrictions now be lifted and all posters treated equally by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

For it is clear from all this foolishness that any wish to dominate - is his alone.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 07:17 PM

The other Rogered thread has gone for 8 days without anyone replying to him. I hope thats the beginning of a trend instead of a one-off.

If only this were the case........Closed threads and deleted posts

You can of course find all the usual comments from the usual suspects - those that would have normally littered that thread - in the following thread instead.

Not posting on thread

Finding ways to prevent discussion on a discussion forum does not somehow seem to be the correct use of any 'moderator's efforts. There once was a time on our forum when the idea was to encourage posting - not inhibit it. Perhaps there will be again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 07:26 PM

A non political BS section please? has been closed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 05:53 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an exsisting post and did not refresh this thread.

Reopened per request from Shambles.
-Joe Offer-


Thank you. Perhaps reasonable discussion can now resume on this thread and it can be explained here exactly how starting threads and posting to them can prevent resonable discussion on our forum - as stated by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

However the following thread has been closed, effectively preventing any reasonable discussion on that thread from continuing.

Non political BS section please?

Can our forum now assume that the special restrictions imposed on my contributions have no been lifted and that all posters will now receive equal treatment - as I have also requested?
    Restrictions are still in effect on Shambles, Martin Gibson, and Gargoyle. They have been lifted from "Peace" because he has shown marked improvement. The issue with Shambles is the continued flooding of Mudcat with countless posts that contain the same information, and often multiple exact copies of the same post. This pattern continued over more than five years before any restrictions were placed on Shambles. If Shambles wishes to discuss Mudcat editing policy, he may continue to do so - in one thread at a time.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 02:55 PM

Too bad he can't keep his argumentative offerings over here and leave threads like the Irwin obituary thread alone. The man has no common sense when it comes to knowing when to stop talking and just leave well enough alone.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Jeri
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 03:24 PM

Took 9 days, but somebody finally replied. This place is too funny sometimes. Too bad it's not supposed to be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 05:43 PM

That's a hard question, Jeri. Would it have been better for SRS to respond in the Irwin obituary, encouraging the attempt to turn yet another thread into a gripe about Mudcat policy?

I would have moved the offending Shambles message into this thread, where if could be forgotten, but there have been responses there. It's a good example of the reason why restrictions were imposed upon him. While it might be appropriate for Shambles to make a passing comment about a Mudcat problem in a thread where there's evidence of that problem, there certainly was no sense in posting a copy of an entire message from the "Censorship on Mudcat" thread, as part of a message that had nothing at all to do with the death of Steve Irwin. If this breaking into the Steve Irwin thread were a one-time thing, it wouldn't be a problem - but it has been something that has continued over a number of years.

Shambles asks for "equal treatment." That's nice, I suppose, but there hasn't been anybody else in the history of Mudcat who has posed the sort of problem that Shambles creates. As I've said above, there are four people in the history of Mudcat who have been placed on restriction because of problematic conduct - Shambles and two others are still on restriction, and the restrictions on Shambles are lighter than the restrictions have been on the other three. If he continues to attempt to attempt to evade these restrictions, he will receive the same 100 percent review that the others have had, and all of his complaint posts will be moved into a single thread.

So, those are the restrictions, plain and simple - if Shambles wishes to complain about Mudcat and its editing policy, he may do so - but only in one thread per day. If he posts complaints in this thread today, he has to wait until tomorrow to post complaints in any other thread. Any offending messages will be moved or deleted.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Jeri
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 06:01 PM

Joe, I don't know. For the record, I knew someone was going to post here, and for all I know, SRS never noticed that it had been only Shambles posting. People avoided talking to him here, but not anywhere else, because they like playing the game with him. YOU like playing the game with him, but if you want to spend this much time and attention on him, it's your call. Until Max boots his ass out, you'll constantly be cleaning up for him.

...over and out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 06:35 PM

" They have been lifted from "Peace" because he has shown marked improvement."

Bullshit I have. The marked improvemment is just because the Nazi bastards and racist bastards have been taking some time off. I have made NO effort to 'improve' as you put it. You are welcome to yank my membership anytime you choose. I do not respond well to threats. By anyone, whether implied or explicit.
    Well, whatever.
    I haven't noticed you flooding the Forum with messages at a one-a-minute rate for several months, and I haven't seen you going anonymous to post provocative messages or impersonating Nazis. I call that improvement. If that conduct happens again, the restrictions will be reimposed.
    If Shambles continues or increases his disruptive conduct, the restrictions on him will be increased. I hope that will be all I have to say on the matter.
    Jeri, I suppose there's an interesting challenge in "playing the game" with Shambles, but it gets to be a problem when it's too widespread - especially when it spreads into threads on other topics, or prevents discussion of matters that we really do need to talk about. Thus the need to restrict Shambles to a degree.
    -Joe Offer-

Joe, you remember when Max said "Don't make me separate you two?" Shambles trolls you, you troll him, and then you take a swipe at Martin Gibson, gargoyle and Peace just for the hell of it. THAT's the 'game' I'm talking about. -Jeri, sick of this childish bullshit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 06:58 PM

You go ahead and impose the restrictions. Here, maybe this will help: take your pomposity and shove it up where the sun don't shine.

You got a problem with Shambles, address Shambles. Leave me the fuck out of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 09:20 PM

Settle down, peoples


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 09:26 PM

YES SIR!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 09:35 PM

On second thought, fuck this horseshit. You want me outta here, Joe, I am gone. Change your name to Tito and and have fun. I didn't merit your remarks. I do not need someone like you to tell me I have been a good little boy, one who has met Joe Offer's 'standards'. Judging by some of your recent posts, your standards ain't something I care to meet.

Thank you for the remark, Jeri.

Art, when you are on the receiving end I hope someone tells you to 'settle down'.
    That all happened months ago, Peace, maybe longer. I have no complaint about you and I have no reason to want you to leave. You have made a wonderful contribution to Mudcat in the last several months, and you've done extraordinary work finding song lyrics.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 09:43 PM

Peace, can we have one clarification here? Do you or don't you dekiberateky post anonymously even if only to repsond to or address "Nazi bastards and racist bastards"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 09:53 PM

``````````````````..............it's catching, it seems.

One of the few things Shambles ever did that I totally approved of was, a few years ago, to make a series of posts, some in bright colors, touting **Max's Private Messages** (I tried to find it, but...)

It made the point that some communications could best be done that way rather than letting our internal bickerings hang out there in public.

When people are typing faster than they think, sometimes they phrase things in a way that lights fuses.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 10:00 PM

Actually, Peace, I don't think I was referring to you, but take it as you choose.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: bobad
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 10:25 PM

How to Have Better Conversations
Thursday August 31st 2006, 12:03 am
Filed under: Entertainment, Lifehacks, Knowledge

Some time back I noticed two things:

    * I enjoy good conversations
    * I want to have more good conversations

Nothing revolutionary, but because of those things, I started thinking more about conversation and how to improve it. Here's what I came up with.

These are some reasons that people converse:

    * Conversation brings back memories from your own life.

    * It validates your experiences and opinions and makes you feel understood and accepted.

    * It gives you knowledge about a subject you're interested in. For example, what it's like to live in South Africa, how it feels to be a parent etc.

    * It sparks ideas in you for improving your life, business or hobbies.
    * It gets you something you want.

    * It gives you the satisfaction that comes from convincing (or trying to convince) someone to change their opinion on some subject.

    * The feeling of satisfaction you get from helping someone feel better.

    * The power you feel for making someone feel bad. This is obviously not a good motive for conversation, but it is a real one nonetheless.

    * Conversation is a way to sort out your thoughts and feelings. By talking to someone who cares enough to listen, you often get the time and perspective needed to better understand yourself.

    * It's an escape from stress and monotony. A way to laugh and lighten things up.

While most of these are valid reasons to have conversation, they don't directly indicate what makes a good conversation. Ideally at the end of a conversation both people should leave looking forward to the next conversation. Before going on to how to have a good conversation, here are a few things that make conversation unenjoyable.

    * You didn't feel listened to. The other person either didn't stop talking long enough for you to speak, or when you were talking they were too busy thinking about the next thing they were going to say to hear what you were saying.

    * You didn't feel understood. Despite the fact that the other person was listening intently, you didn't feel like he or she actually understood what you were saying.

    * You felt manipulated. The other person tried to get you to do or say something you didn't want to do or say.

    * Gossip. While tempting, gossip generally does not lead to a good conversation. It destroys trust - how can you be sure the other person isn't gossiping about you?

    * Intellectual inequality. It's hard (but not impossible) to have a good conversation if one party perceives the other as less (or more) intelligent. While this can still lead to a valuable and interesting exchange, it often does not.

    * Lack of common views. This can go both ways. If both parties to the conversation respect each other's intelligence, differences in politics, religion, culture etc. can make for very interesting conversation and debates. On the other hand, if there is a lack of respect or extreme differences, conversation can become uncomfortable.

Knowing what makes conversation good and bad, we can draw some conclusions about what to do in order to have a good conversation. Here's the good stuff.

    * Don't be selfish. It sounds harsh, but it's not as obvious or easy as it seems. Conversation is give and take. There are times when you should listen and times to talk. Doing too much of either is not conducive to good conversation. Listen carefully to the other person then state your opinions after you understand theirs. Even if you are giving advice or teaching someone something, the listening/talking ratio should generally be around 50/50. In the end, the time you feel like you're "giving up" to listen leads to better conversation. Everyone wins.

    * Prepare for good conversation. Read widely. If you know you'll have a chance for a conversation, learn about the interests of the person you'll be talking with. Keep up with the news. Broaden your knowledge. This not only will help you have interesting subjects to bring up, but it will help you understand the context of the conversation without interrupting it to ask for a definition. It's is called cultural literacy.

    * Don't manipulate, or in other words, be honest and up-front. For the most part, people will immediately recognize when they are being manipulated. You may get away with it, but the chances that the person will look forward to their next conversation with you are slim.

    * Reciprocate. If someone shares details about their life, it is natural for them to expect for you to do the same thing. It's not good if after a conversation someone feels that they've laid their life bare before you and know nothing about you. The opposite is true as well.

    * Avoid gossip and complaining. Both of these things are extremely easy to do and both lead to negative, empty feelings afterwards.

    * Don't be afraid to differ. Conversation is boring if everyone agrees. If you don't agree, say you don't and explain why.

    * Know and use your sense of humor in moderation. Figure out what's natural for you and go with it.

I'll finish by saying that I'm by no means an expert conversationalist so take my advice with a grain of salt, but hopefully you'll find some of these tips useful. If you've got suggestions for having better conversations, by all means, comment!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: JennyO
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 10:37 PM

By the way - 300 - FWIW


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Janie
Date: 06 Sep 06 - 11:38 PM

bobad,

Excellent! Absolutely excellent.

Janie


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 01:17 AM

I've never read this idiotic thread before, but through reference to it I knew it was where the Shambles nonsense was parked (whether he wrote it here or not, I know not). I just made a comment here to see if I could get his sorry ass off of the Irwin obit thread. The guy has the social grace of a banana slug. I don't spend much time reading threads here, only a small fraction of them. That doesn't mean I don't have a pretty good idea of who started what--I sometimes bet myself that Little Hawk or William Shatner or Amos or Giok or one of the others started a new one. So I thought that waving this flag at Shambles might make him move off of the obit thread he's trashed with his nonsense.

Pardon me for stumbling into the booby-traped thread that everyone is apparently lurking around to see if someone trips it. Why doesn't someone just block Shambles and be done with it? You'll feel just as bad now as you would in three months when you actually do it, but the rest of us will get some relief a lot sooner.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 01:21 AM

A Banana Slug! Oh, my...those are strong words. Slugs don't get nearly as much press as they rightly deserve, either. How insensitive. Let's hear it for slugs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 02:20 AM

Gees! I wanna get out of this squabble! I think I want to talk about banana slugs. Do they respond to salt the same way regular slugs do? We have lots of banana slugs on the California Coast, but I've only seen them when I've been in the company of strong women who would do horrible things to me if I attempted to salt a banana slug...
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 02:33 AM

That's a hard question, Jeri. Would it have been better for SRS to respond in the Irwin obituary, encouraging the attempt to turn yet another thread into a gripe about Mudcat policy?
Joe Offer


For the record the post that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is getting his knickers twisted about was a response to the following and another post in that thread whach just called another poster a F******. That he sees this post as an attempt to turn that thread into a gripe about Mudcat policy - reveals more about his motives than it does about others.

Subject: RE: Obit: Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin is dead (Sep06)
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 10:18 PM

I cannot believe this thread is still running. I liked the man and believed he knew what it took to get a message across in this day and age. Stilly, Ron, Don, and many others tend to agree while a number of you don't. For those who don't I have seen some well thought out arguments and I suppose we could continue those discussions and probably agree to disagree....a well tested Mudcat scenario.

Spaw


Why are these posts in that thread (and many others) not also worrying the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

The problem is that The fuss and the semi-official witch-hunt against me that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team actively encourages - makes it impossible for me to make any post where some posters feel that it is accepatable to make some personal judgement of my worth or some reference to my views on censorship. Most of the time I ignore this.

Whereever they may be expressed - these are my honest and moderately views and the role of any 'moderator' is to simply to enable these views - not to be seen to be selectivly passing and imposing their judgement on the worth of the poster.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 02:49 AM

So, Shambles, what do you know about salting banana slugs?
Can you make escargot from slugs?
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 04:17 AM

Escargot?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 05:15 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

That all happened months ago, Peace, maybe longer. I have no complaint about you and I have no reason to want you to leave. You have made a wonderful contribution to Mudcat in the last several months, and you've done extraordinary work finding song lyrics.
-Joe Offer-


As for slugs - perhaps those who are not interested in this thread's subject can make their personal judgements along with the others in the thread created for this purpose? Not posting to a thread

I've never read this idiotic thread before, but through reference to it I knew it was where the Shambles nonsense was parked (whether he wrote it here or not, I know not). I just made a comment here to see if I could get his sorry ass off of the Irwin obit thread. The guy has the social grace of a banana slug. I don't spend much time reading threads here, only a small fraction of them. That doesn't mean I don't have a pretty good idea of who started what--I sometimes bet myself that Little Hawk or William Shatner or Amos or Giok or one of the others started a new one. So I thought that waving this flag at Shambles might make him move off of the obit thread he's trashed with his nonsense.

For the record, the thread referred to was a BS one. Had that been an OBIT thread - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's rules - it would have been in the music section.

Slowly the message must be coming across that all these noble sounding justifications are just posters being encouraged by the example currently set - to mind everyone elses's business and pass judgement on the worth of other posters? Which is a totally pointless exercise as the current result of all this demonstrates. Had I responded in kind to all of those personal judgements encouaged to be directed at me - the situation would be even worse. Perhaps a little credit can be given to me for this?

That the object of our forum is to encouage discussion from as many posters as possible and not finding ways to judge each other's worth and prevent discussion. And not to encourage only like-minded posting but even arguments. Not name-calling but the enabling of moderately expressed differences of opinon are part of what made our forum different. To manage to get a forum where posters can agree to disagree - was no mean feet and about as good as it gets. But it cannot be imposed, only encouraged by example.

That all the tools required to read and post what is to your taste and ignore what is not - are already provided.

That no one is being forced to read or post anything and if any one does not like this - they are free to go elswhere. Our forum is like any other place that is open to to the public. If you do not like the present company - your only option is to go - not to ask for or expect others to be removed because they may not be to your taste.

That the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has his current Public Enemy Number One - but no real crime to justify the resulting witch-hunt. That other posters feel encouraged (and safe) to join in these witch-hunts is hardly surprising but does not refect much credit on anyone.

Can the special posting restrictions on my contributions be lifted and can all posters been seen to receive equal treatment by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Not posting on a thread
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 05:25 AM

Is it safe over here? That "closed and deleted" thread is too full of people who take themselves entirely too seriously. I thought I was going to get eaten alive.

Pehaps if it were your posts being 'silently delted' and your threads closed and were the victim of one of your own publicly mounted witch-hunts you may take it (and the resulting mess) more seriously than you obviously appear to?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 05:52 AM

You may have missed the following two editing comments as they were both inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

Well, whatever.
I haven't noticed you flooding the Forum with messages at a one-a-minute rate for several months, and I haven't seen you going anonymous to post provocative messages or impersonating Nazis. I call that improvement. If that conduct happens again, the restrictions will be reimposed.
If Shambles continues or increases his disruptive conduct, the restrictions on him will be increased. I hope that will be all I have to say on the matter.

Jeri, I suppose there's an interesting challenge in "playing the game" with Shambles, but it gets to be a problem when it's too widespread - especially when it spreads into threads on other topics, or prevents discussion of matters that we really do need to talk about. Thus the need to restrict Shambles to a degree.
-Joe Offer-


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

Joe, you remember when Max said "Don't make me separate you two?" Shambles trolls you, you troll him, and then you take a swipe at Martin Gibson, gargoyle and Peace just for the hell of it. THAT's the 'game' I'm talking about. -
Jeri, sick of this childish bullshit.


Perhaps our 'moderators' could finally stop abusing their privileged positions (and edit buttons) and post their views like ordinary posters in conventional post that refresh the thread?

And stop abusing our trust by playing games? And concentrate on enabling discussion rather than restricting it complaining about and imposing their judgment their fellow posters?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 06:52 AM

shambles-you are a mad person just trying to make trubble, i wish you go away.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 12:26 PM

The problem is that posting complaints about what other people post (and not just limited to political subjects) is now encouraged and often appears now to be the only game in town.

When anyone making such a complaint been told (as they should have been) to mind their own business and to concentrate on their own posting - they would only have ever been one forum.

Folk don't need to be encouraged to gossip and pass judgement on each other's worth, for they will do this anyway. Once you have been seen to encourage it - it is difficult to change.

But not, I suggest - impossible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 12:52 PM

Which passages are more vital and should be given greater attention? The ones in ordinary type...or the ones in bold type...or the ones in italics?

And why do we not see some passages in bright colours instead?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM

"The problem is that The fuss and the semi-official witch-hunt against me that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team actively encourages - makes it impossible for me to make any post where some posters feel that it is accepatable to make some personal judgement of my worth or some reference to my views on censorship. Most of the time I ignore this."

...or, perhaps you dug your own grave and your comments have been rendered useless.

You will not look into a mirror or accept personal responsibility and your are NOT ignoring the posts. You use it as justification for your paranoia and it is just not the way everyone else sees things. It is only your view, and while you are certainly entitled to one, you should try looking at the world that everyone else on Mudcat is seeing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 01:21 PM

Duplicate post, Shambles...

Well despite the anonymous link implies - I thought I posted but when I looked I could not see the post here. So I tried again

Some anonymous person with an edit buttom and too much time on their hands had moved it to Closed threads and deleted posts   but gave no indication of this action.

I assume the same person then deleted my second attempt. All done to prevent me from preventing reasonable discussion.

I do have to limit him to one thread at a time, so the rest of us can actually carry on reasonable discussions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 01:44 PM

You will not look into a mirror or accept personal responsibility and your are NOT ignoring the posts.

I feel that if I responded with personal jusgements of all those who feel they have some right to post only personal judgements of my worth and who are encouraged to post only this - and our forum was littered up with such exchanges - you may have a point

As I don't - and I am not now responding with any personal judgements of your worth - perhaps you could at least give me some credit for this?

Perhaps when (some of) our moderators show the lead in accepting their responsibilty for this current mess (and when you also ask and expect them to) I may follow their example in accepting whatever part I may have.

But all I am trying to do is post and to enable all posters to be treated equally - I am not preventing anyone else from posting or forcing them to read my posts - am I?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 01:56 PM

"But all I am trying to do is post and to enable all posters to be treated equally - I am not preventing anyone else from posting or forcing them to read my posts - am I? "

See, that proves the point that many of us have been trying to make. It isn't about "preventing" or "forcing" - it is simply the fact that we are able to read and then we comment on what you said. Don't blame the moderators, they merely came in AFTER the fire started.


"As I don't - and I am not now responding with any personal judgements of your worth - perhaps you could at least give me some credit for this?"

Again, this seems to be an example of paranoia. I am not "judging your worth", I am trying to reason with you and tell you what many of us are seeing. YOU are taking any criticism of your action personally.

I do not recall EVER seeing you admit to saying the wrong thing on Mudcat. You defend every sentence to the death. You join in the conversations and then when you are questioned, you become defensive and won't admit that you might have done the wrong thing.   

Then, when people get frustrated and lash out at you, you really enter a zone that you seem to be enjoying - martyr. Your civil rights are not violated here.   You have built up a reputation, just like Martin Gibson and others did, and then you wonder why no one takes you seriously.

I am sure you are a bright guy. I can't explain your behavior, but I can only point out how many of us are seeing it.   Your posts have become like a small child acting up at the dinner table. You can't be ignored because you are all over conversation.    Maybe spanking is the answer??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Sep 06 - 02:45 PM

"All done to prevent me from preventing reasonable discussion" the Shambles

hahhahahhahahhahahha


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 08:14 AM

Again, this seems to be an example of paranoia. I am not "judging your worth", I am trying to reason with you and tell you what many of us are seeing. YOU are taking any criticism of your action personally.

Perhaps you should try and actually read some of the personal judements of my worth, the name-calling that it is thought to be fun to be encouraged and the various and physically impossible suggestion made. Even entire threads are started for such things. Most of which I do not respond to at all and never in kind.

Are you suggesting that these are not intentional judgements of my worth? I make no claims for perfection but my posting record is certainly better that many of those who would feel themselves qualified to post only judge me. Do you consider then that all other parties are perfect?

I could respond here with a similar public judgement of what I judged your short-commings and speculate on your mental health - but what would be the point?

The point remains that all that is important is what is said - not who may be saying it, where, when or how poorly you may judge it to be expressed or its spelling and grammar. It is only important to be able to agree to disagree and it not honourable to try and find noble sounding excuses to restrict or prevent any other named poster from posting what they may wish to.


No one is being forced to read or respond to my views or the views of any other poster-are they? And is none of your or my business what we may think of another poster's worth or posting actions and so what is the point, by the example currently set, of encouraging our forum to be littered with such posts?

If you really want to make personal comments and suggestions to me or another poster - there are PMs for this purpose where they do not have to be inflicted on our forum. And in the case of non-members, where this is not available - perhaps the best option is possible to just move on?

Non posting of judgements week


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 08:35 AM

hahhahahhahahhahahha

I do have to limit him to one thread at a time, so the rest of us can actually carry on reasonable discussions. I suppose that since this is "his" topic, this will become "his" thread, and I'll have to close the other one. I'll wait and see what he does.
Joe Offer


I am glad that someone seems to find the concept of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team silently deleting posts and closing threads in order to enable reasonable discussion - to be as funny as I would do - if the implications of accepting such perfect nonsense did not present such a real threat to the long history of free and open discussion on our forum.

It is clear to me how the actions taken and restrictions imposed on my posts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team will prevent reasonable and free discussion on our forum.

It is not at all clear how the posting of my moderately espressed views are preventing (as claimed) any other posters from carrying on with reasonable discussion on our forum. Can someone explain why my postings (only) should be HAVE to be restricted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team for this reason?

Perhaps these restrictions can now be removed and all posters be seen to treated equally?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: A return to only one section?
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 08:50 AM

In this case, it is hard to find any particular sin or crime to justify banning....being terminally tedious is sort of a different matter.

Does a poster being judged to be 'teminally tedious' justify any form of selective posting to be imposed? If so perhaps quite a few posters should now be concerned?

I suggest that being judged to be tedious, repetitious, or boring - no matter how irritating some may find this - is not justification for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to impose any form of imposed censorship action.

Perhaps you would agree that these restrictions should now be lifted?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 09:39 AM

Don't blame the moderators, they merely came in AFTER the fire started.

If what you state were true - whether they get blamed would rather depend on what these 'moderator's' actions were after a fire started.

If their actions were not to extinguish them but only to fan the flames and encourage the fire (even unintentionally) - I suggest that the blame for the house burning house down would be all theirs.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team in particular is quick to blame anyone and everyone for not being able to impose on our forum the peace he requires. But having admitted this failure does not seem to see that the example set by his double standards have played any part in this or now be prepared to take any personal responsibility for it. Doing exactly as he pleases but speaking for other 'moderators' by claiming this to be 'we'.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team now appears to see the only option open to him is to plough on with the same counter-productive imposition. At least until our forum can excude free contributions from the public and become the members only posting forum that he already treats it as.

Seemingly the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team sees 'moderation' on our forum, as some form of game - where he alone makes the rules up for others to adhere to and be judged by (referred by him to as Mudcat Policy) but which he does not think should apply to him. And where to cause totally confusion and even in the same post or editing comment - he will jump from the role of ordinary poster - expressing their views to that of 'Head Honcho' - imposing them.

Jeri, I suppose there's an interesting challenge in "playing the game" with Shambles, but it gets to be a problem when it's too widespread - especially when it spreads into threads on other topics, or prevents discussion of matters that we really do need to talk about. Thus the need to restrict Shambles to a degree.
-Joe Offer-


Perhaps the one requiring restriction on our forum - is not me but those who are now activly preventing, restricting and inhibiting reasonable discussion by 'silent deletion' and thread closures?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 10:32 AM

Should anyone wonder why this matters to me to the extent it does - it is because (as the following public statement from Max explains) I feel partly responsible for this current for of censorship being imposed on our forum in the first place. It certainly was not introduced at my bidding and no matter how well-intioned it may have been - the idea that members would anonymously be imposing censorship on the contributions of their fellow members is one that was guaranteed to only cause division and conflict. It is not too late to change this.

User Name Thread Name Subject Posted [PM] Max Max is taking action (76* d) Max is taking action 22 Jul 99

I've been doing a lot of thinking about the tone of the Mudcat lately. The Shambles leaving finally allowed me to come to some kind of conclusion about how to handle it from a Mudcat Administrator point of view. For one thing, I have marveled at the comradery and love and knowledge and friendship that the Mudcat has been. I have felt safe in meeting new people here and inviting them into my home. But something is changing.

To get to the point, I have decided to watch the threads with the help of some of the volunteers and communication with all Mudcat members to identify people who "cross the line". Obviously there is a lot of interpretation and gray area in determining this, but I am going to make it black and white.
It's real simple. If I FEEL that you are not a positive factor in this community and/or said things to drive folks away or scare anybody, etc., your membership will be deactivated until you call me on the telephone to personally discuss the situation. I cannot let another fine person leave, and I cannot support a community where people are not comfortable sharing who they are and what the love, and I will not continue publishing the Mudcat if we cannot find a way to control it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 10:44 AM

"I feel partly responsible for this current for of censorship being imposed on our forum in the first place."

Don't worry about it.   There is no such thing as "censorship" in a forum like this. It is privately owned, the users are subject to the discretion of managment. You could not walk into a movie theater and then start singing loudly when the feature starts - the management would throw you out. This is not censorship.   Forums like these are not "public" - they are subject to editing - AS THEY SHOULD BE.

Some people refuse to understand that and will continue to hold their breathe and stomp their feet. Sad.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 10:59 AM

If you don't wish to encourage the poster, stop responding. People repeat what others have said before then wonder why the thread keeps appearing and continuing. It's a no-brainer. Now it's become the Ron and Shambles Show.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:05 AM

There is a difference between a discussion and venting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:09 AM

The result is the same. The thread continues.

You got a window. Open it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:17 AM

I see nothing wrong with the thread continuing if positive discussion is taking place. My window is open, the fresh air feels good.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:23 AM

Say that to Shambles and stop being the fortieth in on a gang rape.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:30 AM

Shame on you guest.   Everything I am saying here is read by Shambles. Why don't you use your real identity if you wish to attack someone.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:50 AM

Why do you continue to fan the flame?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 11:57 AM

?? I am involved in a discussion. I made my point. It appears you are the one fanning flames here.

Why is it that when someone cannot logically offer rebutal or information that might change an opinion they it necessary to attack the individual, often becoming anonymous because they realize that their attack would be viewed as childish???   In that respect, Shambles is right.

I disagree with Shambles stance about Mudcat and the way he handled the situation and yes, I do think that he has taking it too personally. I tried to point out instances where I thought he was wrong. I made my case without any name calling or attack. If you wish to view it as something else in order to stir up controversy, then it becomes your problem.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Nick
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:00 PM

Perhaps a naive question but does anyone else apart from Roger get censored?

Perhaps Readers Digest could do a shorter version of the (approaching) 1/3million characters on this thread (must be hugely over that if you pull in the other threads that say exactly the same thing).

READERS DIGEST ABRIDGED VERSION

Shambles: The moderators sometimes have moderated me and I think it's wrong.
The Moderators: Sometimes we moderate the threads - we believe we do this reasonably and without bias
Shambles: I don't agree with that.
The Moderator(s): OK
Shambles: I feel the need to reassert my position.



That's about it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:07 PM

"All done to prevent me from preventing reasonable discussion"

Roger, that sentence struck me as very funny. Shall we dissect it?

"All done to prevent me" (All done in the cause of keeping me from) "from preventing" (keeping me from) "reasonable" (sensible) "discussion" (communication)

"All done in the cause of keeping me from taking part in reasonable communication"

No. That's not what you said. Let me try again.

"All done in the cause of keeping me from making reasonable communication impossible."

That's closer.

Speaking of "setting an example", does it not seem incongrous to you to be the person perceived as making reasonable discussion impossible?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Not posting on a thread
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:17 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an exsisting post and did not refresh the thread.

At his request, I reopened it. apparently, he likes talking to himself there.
-Joe Offer-


I think this was in reference to the following thread Closed threads and deleted posts


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:33 PM

My dear Ebbie

Ebbie I am glad you found my sentence amusing – that was the intention.

Perhaps you can explain how reasonable discussion can now be possible? When as a result of measures designed to enable posters to carry on reasonable discussion - every other poster can post and even address posts to me – on to a thread called A return to only one section but they are denied seeing any response I may make – because some anonymous fellow poster is moving all my posts to this thread?

Perhaps you would agree that whatever your view of my worth may be - being seen to impose selective censorship measures like this - on one poster will only make the current methods of running of our forum look sillier than they already are?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:40 PM

Especially when I appear to be able to post to a thread called Not posting to a thread without these posts being subject to any anonymous imposition.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Sep 06 - 12:45 PM

No - I spoke too soon.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 05:07 AM

You could not walk into a movie theater and then start singing loudly when the feature starts - the management would throw you out. This is not censorship.

This would not be editing either - would it? But it would be imposition. And would being judged as being boring, tedious or repetitive really be grounds for any bouncers to throw you out of a theatre and then encourage and appeal for public support for this?

Of course, where one member of the invited public IS actually preventing others from enjoying or taking part in the the activity. It makes perfect sense to introduce proportionate measures to deal with this. But here - if you find a thread, a poster or post not to be to your taste - no one is forcing anyone to even open the thread, read the post or respond to it. Posters can decide for themselves. So why is it now thought somehow noble on our forum to prevent adult posters from being able to makaing this choice for themselves?

If such measures are seen to be used sparingly, openly and fairly, for the benefit of all - such measures would certainly have my full support on our forum. As they once did. If I supported the current censorship system on our forum - no doubt I would then be perfectly free once again to post these views in as many threads as I wanted. As other posters who support these actions, currently are.

When such measures are plainly seen to be abused by (some of) these 'moderators' and seen to encourage some of the invited public just to post only to judge and complain about the worth of their fellows and get these measures anonymously imposed on others - such measures - no matter how well-intentioned - are counter-productive.

For our forum is NOT a theatre - is it? The whole purpose is to enable and encourage contributions from the public. If these contributions are moderately expressed there are no grounds for any form of imposed editing actions. The bottom line - as any poster will be able to see - is that certain views are not encouraged and threads on this subject are quickly closed, posts are silently deleted and some totally bogus but noble sounding reason is provided as justification.

There is no reason why all discussion of this issue could not have always been contained on one thread. The reason why so many are started is BECAUSE any existing ones on any aspect of this issue are quickly closed in order to prevent discussion of it. The way all posters are treated on our forum is the only thing that all posters have in common but it is the one thing that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not appear to want our form to discuss.

If the object of our forum is to enable and encourage reasonable discussion on all subjects - perhaps our forum would at least agree that this is NOT acheived by our bouncers anonymously 'silently' deleting and moving posts and by closing threads and imposing selective posting restrictions on certain posters - because of what their moderately expressed and honest views may be.   

Whatever you may think - or be encouraged to think of my worth - the opportunity is currently here to have your say on this subject.

In order to protect all parties - can I again request that all posters be treated equally and openly on our forum by those who would feel themselves qualfied to impose their judgement on us?

And that all editing comments are seen to be limited to where some form of imposed censorship has actually taken place and that an editing comment is ALWAYS provided to indicate where,why and when such action has been judged necessary?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 05:37 AM

Shambles,

Dewey is posting on another thread. Please go talk with him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

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

It is sad that too much notice cannot be taken of any instruction or assurance given to our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team in the form of editing comments. For he has shown that he is not someone who feels his assurances should be honoured. Or apologises, takes any responsibility for the resulting effects of this failure or makes any effort to correct them. Seeing this presumably as part of the 'game' he feels he can set the example of encouraging to be played with the contributions that the site's owner has invited and in the process, compromising the integrity of all concerned in the process.

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


It was not my request for any special treatment but the above assurance was publicly given to our forum in the following thread   Do you need to be censored?   which (along with nearly all the other threads on this subject) - is now closed.

Had this assurance been honoured – there would not have been any need for any subsequent threads to be started. No need for them to be subjected to imposed closure and no need to impose selective restrictions on a single poster or for noble sounding attempts to be made to justify these restrictions.

Perhaps these restrictions can now be lifted and all posters treated equally and any censorship judged to be required be seen to be undertaken openly and fairly?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Zen Buddhist
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 09:11 AM

If a Roger posts in a thread and there is noone there to read it does it make a point?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 01:19 PM

Even if no one (but me) posts to a thread - it does not mean that it is not being read.

If the thread closed or a post 'silently deleted' - then no one is able to read it. Which is of course why this is now done on our forum and why noble sounding attempts at justification are made.

My point is to try to enable all posters to always be able to have the choice and not to have this choice made for them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 02:23 PM

I had some free time this morning, Roger, and I looked up your posting history. As you probably recall, your first post was in August 1998 and for a total of 12000 plus in the years since. Have you ever tried to suss out the percentage of complaining ones versus posts that showed us that you are glad to be alive?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 06:07 AM

I had some free time this morning, Roger, and I looked up your posting history. As you probably recall, your first post was in August 1998 and for a total of 12000 plus in the years since. Have you ever tried to suss out the percentage of complaining ones versus posts that showed us that you are glad to be alive?

No.

Is your post a complaint Ebbie? Our forum may not judge from the sound of this post (and many of your others) as if you are all that 'glad to be alive'. Especially if you consider that looking-up and posting only to make personal judgements of my posting history is really the best way of spending your free time. Do you consider that volunteering to anonymously impose your judgement on your fellow posters on our forum is showing us an example of being glad to be alive?

Perhaps you may accept that that no one is forcing you or any other poster to read my posts or respond to them? And that despite the example currently set by (some of) our 'moderators', that the posting only of personal judgements and complaints about a poster's worth is now acceptable on our forum – that however I may choose to post is really none of your business? And more importantly that my attempts to post my moderately expressed and honest views - is in no way preventing any other poster from contributing to any reasonable discussion?

That if I were not glad to be alive I could also ignore the thread's subject to respond with a post containing only a personal judgement of you? But as such a post would only litter-up our forum and totally fail to achieve anything except elicit a further response in kind - what would be the point of such a post? There are PMs for this - why not use them?

The following was posted when it was (wrongly) assumed that this site's owner, Max had prevented me from posting. Whatever the justification given for the selective restrictions imposed on my posts only, by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, this post shows that our forum's perception is different. That is only 'complaints' about one issue that are seen to be the problem to (some of) those who feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on the rest of our forum.

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.


All I am suggesting and trying to be able to discuss on our forum, is a return to where we were 'all playing under the same rules'. If we currently were 'all seen to be playing under the same rules' – there would be little need for anyone's suggestions to be labelled as complaints. And for this to be done – in order to provide some justification for imposed restrictions and thread closures, just to prevent posters from deciding for themselves whether they wished to read, respond or ignore contributions?

The penny eventually appears to dropping and even the usual suspects (after thousands of posts) have finally grasped the concept that (conventional) posting to a thread only to make personal judgements about the worth of a poster -- only refreshes the thread. Sadly – and once encouraged – the usual suspects do not appear to be quite able to prevent themselves and now start threads to enable this witch-hunt to continue in this thread. Not posting to a thread

Where their fun games continue at the expense of a single poster but ironically in a thread where – due to the selective restrictions imposed on my posts only – by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - a thread which this poster is currently unable to post to.

Such a situation could hardly be described as fair – and as fairness is something that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team states that is his concern – perhaps all posters can once again be seen be treated equally and openly?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Not posting on a thread
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 11:02 AM

Five in a row now. Last time, it was 15. How many this time?
Joe Offer


It is hardly fair of you to try and also encourage judgement to be passed on this - especially if you are also counting the posts that you 'silently move' there from this thread (and others).

Perhaps as the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team - you can concentrate on encouraging posters to contribute by being seen to treat all posters equally and openly - rather than being seen to think it amusing to set the example of encouraing other posters to indulge in games that are designed only to inhibit posting.

I speak as the only poster who really is NOT posting to this thread. Not that this is out of choice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 02:30 AM

Forums like these are not "public" - they are subject to editing - AS THEY SHOULD BE.

I would suggest this is the case only where such a policy was clearly stated and understood prior to anyone first entering a forum. Many long-term posters here are still under the impression that this is an unmoderated forum and they support it on that basis. And a pretence is kept up (for their benefit), that this is still the case.

Our discussion forum has always been open by the site's owner, to encourage the public's contributions and it currently remains so. Should it not follow that posters should expect to see on our forum, the public's words as posted and be able to decide for themselves what to read, respond to or ignore?

And if this not now to be the case - is it really too much to expect that they are always made aware of when, and the reason why they are not seeing the public's words as posted, and the identity of whoever is imposing their judgement on the postings of others?

In order to protect all parties - can I again request that all posters be seen to be treated equally and openly on our forum by those who would feel themselves qualfied to impose their judgement on our forum?

And that all editing comments are seen to be limited to only where some form of imposed censorship has actually taken place and that an editing comment is ALWAYS provided to indicate to our forum, where and why such action has been judged to be necessary, in our name and order to protect us?

A move to this open approach is the only way that posters can now feel safe from personally motivated editing actions and the only way 'moderators' can feel safe from any suspicion that their actions are personally motivated.

If (some of) the current holders entrusted with edit buttons are not now prepared to operate in this open manner - perhaps some new ones can be found who are?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 06:20 PM

And there's the rub Shambles.

Some are, some aren't (regarding edit buttons).

You ain't gonna change a thing here. Stop wasting your breath, fingers, thoughts, bandwidth, space. It hasn't changed, isn't changing, won't change. Let it go. What's it matter anyway?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 01:06 PM

Big injustice or small injustice - the only way you can ensure that things this will continue (or get worse) - is to do nothing.

Whatever you may attempt to do - you may not succeed in, but at least you will have made the effort and often you do not have the choice.

But I consider just to have this thread open (again) and be able to have this discussion on this subject - is a move in the right direction.

It does enable all posters to decide for themselves what to read, respond to or ignore on our forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 09:08 PM

If it makes you happy it makes me happy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 09:35 PM

"Forums like these are not "public" - they are subject to editing - AS THEY SHOULD BE.

I would suggest this is the case only where such a policy was clearly stated and understood prior to anyone first entering a forum. Many long-term posters here are still under the impression that this is an unmoderated forum and they support it on that basis."

Unfortunately you appear to be the only long-term poster that feels that way.

Policies can change on a whim, there is no harm in that - not for a forum like this.


"All I am suggesting and trying to be able to discuss on our forum, is a return to where we were 'all playing under the same rules'."

Done. No one has proven otherwise.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Unusual Person
Date: 14 Sep 06 - 04:24 PM

I've just now had one post closed and another deleted! It was my own fault though.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 10:20 AM

Unfortunately you appear to be the only long-term poster that feels that way.

One of the problems of our now split forum - is that many who post only on the music-related are now unware of discussions like this one - so it is difficult to state a definitive answer of what they may think - one way or the other. It is a bit like a ballot result where you don't send out a ballot paper or voting slip.

But the forum headings have not changed in any noticable way from when it was generally accepted that ours was an unmoderated forum (or at least when any imposed censorship was only a very last resort).
Perhaps you would accept that there has been no public annoucement to the effect that this policy intention has changed and that this was now a moderated site? And that it could be possible that some long-term music posters may still be unaware of the true nature and current level of imposed censorship on our forum. Especially as none of us ordinary posters who do take part in these discussions, can know this or make an informed opinion on it.

Policies can change on a whim, there is no harm in that - not for a forum like this.

Possibly not but it may be a good idea to at least inform posters of any major change - don't you think? The main policy that this is a forum open for the public's contributions has not (yet) changed. The worrying thing is that (some of) those entrusted to carry out this policy - now openly state that this attempt has failed and that they are now in favour of a change to exclude the public.

So perhaps those posters who do still beleive in, support the original policly and have always posted on that basis - do have good reason to question the will of (some of) those to use their best efforts to ensure that the original and current policy is made to work? Or of suspecting that they may not in fact be doing this?

"All I am suggesting and trying to be able to discuss on our forum, is a return to where we were 'all playing under the same rules'."

Done. No one has proven otherwise.

I question how much proof you require that we curently are not?

For a start - do you accept that you (and any other posters) are able to start and freely contibute to any thread - but there are special rules and posting restrictions (including silent deltion) - that have been imposed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that apply only to me? I suspect that many posters may see this as one example of us not 'all playing under the same rules'.

Nope. Until Max pulls the plug on him, Shambles gets his one complaint thread to express what's important to him. If it gets out of hand, I'll close it and he can start another thread.
But if I close this one now, Shambles will just start another thread, and another after that, and another. I have no desire to do battle with him. I wish people would ignore him so maybe be'd be talking to a wall and get bored and talk about something else, or go away.
-Joe Offer-


I suggest also that had I posted only to call you such names as in the following example - that this would have been judged as an abusive personal attack and censorship action imposed. There are examples of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and (some of) his known 'moderators' setting the example that using offensive language and much worse name-calling as this - is acceptable posting behaviour.

More examples of this curent double standard set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are available - should you wish it?

I do not post only to personal judgements of named fellow poster or respond in kind to the many name-calling posts that are encourged to be posted to me. I am not protected from these (nor have I asked to be) by our 'moderators' but in fact it is (some of) these 'moderators' who openly set the example that such posts are acceptable posting behaviour. And at the same time judge themselves qualified to impose their judgement on me and other posters and also expect our forum to support this double standard.

"All I am suggesting and trying to be able to discuss on our forum, is a return to where we were 'all playing under the same rules'."

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 10:39 AM

"Perhaps you would accept that there has been no public annoucement to the effect that this policy intention has changed and that this was now a moderated site? "

No. I never felt it was an unmoderated site in all the years that I have been posting here. It seemed clear to me that this was a site was owned by someone and any ownership can make the rules as they see fit.

".. but it may be a good idea to at least inform posters of any major change - don't you think?"

I agree that is a GOOD IDEA to inform posters of "major" changes (and I do think that Max & crew have), but I don't think it is mandatory.   

If I invite you in my home and two hours later you light a cigar and tell you to stop, should you be allowed to continue simply because I failed to mention the "rule" at the start or gave you warning?

"do you accept that you (and any other posters) are able to start and freely contibute to any thread - but there are special rules and posting restrictions (including silent deltion) - that have been imposed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that apply only to me? "

Absolutely not! We are all working on a level playing field, and if I posted along the lines that you have I would expect a few deletions.

Frankly, even if there were a double standard - too bad! This is not a public forum, never has been, and the owners can implement whatever rules they want.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 12:38 PM

Absolutely not! We are all working on a level playing field, and if I posted along the lines that you have I would expect a few deletions.

And what lines would they be exactly? And perhaps you could provide our forum with some evidence to support your claim?

Frankly, even if there were a double standard - too bad! This is not a public forum, never has been, and the owners can implement whatever rules they want.

If our forum had not been open to the public - there would not be any contributors to impose any rules upon. And had such 'rules' as you seem to find acceptable been imposed - there would not be our forum in the form that you found it.

But you would appear to want to have it both ways.

The justification given by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team (and not the site's owner) for his selective censorship of my posts and closing of threads - is that he judges that my posting is somehow 'unfair'. So it would seem that he does not see the application of an unfair double standard on our forum as desirable as you would appear to.

And the attempt at justification made by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is that in preventing my posts from appearing by 'silent deltion', and closing threads in which they are contained - is fair - as this imposed action is somehow judged to be enabling our forum to continue with reasonable discussion.

Perhaps you can explain how the imposition of this deletion and closure works toward such an end - on what you - on one hand claim to BE a level playing field and on the other hand - claim that is also somehow acceptable to not to have the playing field level at all?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM

All those who see a double standard, please raise your hand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM

and....................




If you're British raise the first and second fingers
If you're American raise the middle finger

Make any gesture you think suitable in the direction of anyone you think is obsessed by an imaginary ideal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 01:02 PM

so is that a yes or a no?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:01 PM

Why won't this thread go away?

Well that dangerous and subversive thread will - as it has now been closed.


Done. No one has proven otherwise.

Ron - so is that a yes or a no? I know you have already now moved on to plan B (i.e. the nonsense that there is now no need for a level playing field on our forum) but does that mean that you have finally accepted that it has now been proven that our forum is currently NOT playing under the same rules?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:11 PM

"Ron - so is that a yes or a no? I know you have already now moved on to plan B (i.e. the nonsense that there is now no need for a level playing field on our forum) but does that mean that you have finally accepted that it has now been proven that our forum is currently NOT playing under the same rules? "


Shambles, what are you smoking? Where did I ever say that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:28 PM

That's the advantage of living in a world of your own like Shambles, nobody to argue with, and nobody to tell you you're wrong, oh so wrong!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:34 PM

Frankly, even if there were a double standard - too bad! This is not a public forum, never has been, and the owners can implement whatever rules they want.

That this site's owners can implement whatever rules they want was never at issue. But up to now, Max has always made the effort to ensure that all posters are treated fairly and with respect. Perhaps you would accept this?

If you have finally accepted that it has now been proven that our forum is currently NOT playing under the same rules - as now implemented by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - we could continue our discussion based on some kind of reality?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:39 PM

Again, I fail to see where I said that Mudcat is operating under a double standard.   Shall we look up the word "if" in a dictionary?

Why are you insisting that I have finally accepted anything?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:48 PM

At last! The perfect symbiotic relationship! I have searched years for an example of this. Years and years, I tell you! Thank you, thank you, Ron Olesko and Shambles! My efforts have finally been exonerated. I will now retire gratefully, accept my Nobel Prize, and bask in the fruits of my labors.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 02:53 PM

great, another one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 03:02 PM

What do you mean... "another one"? I am the ONLY research scientist who has made truly revolutionary progress in the study of symbiosis in the last 25 years! No one can compete with my achievements in this area. That's why I am going to win the Nobel Prize.

Now would you please get on with it? Debate some more with Shambles like you are supposed to. He can't respond properly if you don't, and I need some additional prime examples to fully flesh out my thesis.

I will be satisfied if together you can raise this thread to 500 posts in the next few days...as long as your average post does not fall below a total of 25 words in your case and 150 in Shambles' case. If so, it would call my whole theory into question, and that simply doesn't bear thinking about.

So be a good fellow, now, and get on with it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 03:05 PM

yo, Prof! How can he "debate some more" with The Shambles, when the Shambles doesn't allow debate since Shambles states false premises as fact; denies reality, contricicts himself and ignores anything that doesn't fit his strangely warped world-view?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 03:06 PM

Lucullus, you are either beneath me or below me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 03:15 PM

Whatever turns you on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 04:25 PM

Never was a harsher punishment dealt out by a moderator of a website than that by Joe to Shambles: he lets him post on on his course of self destruction to the amusement of the other posters.

Wolfgang (torn between laughter and pity)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 04:39 PM

Wolfgang, I thought that this thread was really funny when I could look at it every few days and see that no one except Shambles had posted...and he did so every day, or several times a day, basically talking to himself. Let's go back to that, folks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 04:40 PM

Please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 04:41 PM

You are right Art. I guess I was poking at windmills myself trying to get him to see what the rest of us see clearly. I will move on. My apologies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,KB
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 04:56 PM

Whew, it goes from nobody but Shambles to no Shambles at all. Quite a plot twist, that.
I know, I'm only feeding the beast, but it has only been about 10 minutes, I'm not really prolonging it much.

I really don't mean the following in a jerk-off way. Shambles, have you ever thought about finding a new past-time? Think of all the time you have spent on this. Might there be something more fulfilling? I am honestly not trying to be an a-hole here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 08:38 PM

Again, I fail to see where I said that Mudcat is operating under a double standard.   Shall we look up the word "if" in a dictionary?

Why are you insisting that I have finally accepted anything?


Perhaps you do need to look up the meaning of if?

What I said was IF you have finally accepted that it has now been proven that our forum is currently NOT playing under the same rules - as now implemented by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - we could continue our discussion based on some kind of reality?

For in our discussion - you have moved on from a position of trying to maintain - against the evidence - that we were all playing under the same rules to a position where even IF this were not the case - any rules at all can be implemented. To which I have agreed could be the case.

So what is it? Have you now accepted the pretty obvious fact that we are not now all playing under the same rules on our forum? Or are you still trying to maintain that we are all playing under the same rules?

Or have you now returned to good old stand-by? Mudcat plan C (the witch-hunt?

Ron- if you really are at all interested in discussing this subject on this thread - perhaps you could explain what would be the point of our forum having rules if they did not apply equally to everyone?

If you are not and just wish to play to the usual suspects perhaps you could do that on Not posting to a thread Which has not been closed.

All I am suggesting and trying to be able to discuss on our forum, is a return to where we were once again seen to 'all be playing under the same rules'. Not all that much a heretical concept - some of us may think?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 08:25 AM

You may have missed the following editing comments as they were inserted into existing posts and which clearly demonstrate, that we are not now all playing under the same rules.

And this thread is closed, too. We allow only one Shambles-Dominated thread at a time. If we don't control him, Shambles tends to post the same thing in five threads, all at the same time.
-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I figure if he starts a complaint thread or posts five complaint messages to a single thread, that's the thread he's chosen to dominate - and all his other complaint posts get moved to that one thread.
The idea is to allow you to express yourself, but to control the duplication and domination. Say what you want - once. As has been said before, the problem is not the content of your posts, but the endless repetition. This restriction on you applies only to your complaints about Mudcat editing - your messages on this subject are confined to one thread at a time. If you post complaints to one thread today, in general you may not post complaints to any other thread today - you have to wait until tomorrow to post complaints to a new thread.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 08:56 AM

The Shambles, I don't think anyone doubts that you are the only person this sanction is applied to. It is a situation of your creation.

What we don't know is whether this "rule" would be applied to anyone else should they persitanly have multiple threads on a topic, etc. While I hope it is never put to the test, my own feeling is that you have set a precident and that any other poster constantly behaving in the same way would receive the same treatment.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 06:35 PM

My posting record will stand up well against the posting records of those who who feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement upon their fellow posters.

And who set the example that the posting of abusive personal attacks, name-calling are now acceptable posting behaviour on our forum.

And who publicly encourage other favoured posters to post only personal judgements of the worth of their fellow posters and to take part in witch-hunts - all liable to inhibit posting - rather than to encourage it.

The main point of the introduction of our 'moderators' was to protect our forum from abusive personal attacks. As (some of) these 'moderators' indulge in this themselves and make no attempts to prevent such offensive posts coming from certain favoured posters as long as these post are directed at certain easy targets - this part of our 'moderators' role is clearly not now taken very seriously.

Most of the current effort seems to be addressed at control and protecting our 'moderators' from any moderately expressed criticism about their actions appearing on our forum. Or at least inhibiting this and limiting our forum's opportunities to see it or respond to any discussion on this subject and encouraging public support for these actions.

The idea proposed to justify all this sillyness is that in someway the imposition of these selective restrictions - adds to reasonable conversation on our forum. Incredibly that for threads to be closed, and to silently delete amd move posts and encourage various other 'fun' attempts to prevent the moderately expressed views of certain posters from appearing as posted - is not our 'moderators' preventing reasonable discussion.

The fact is that all I CAN attempt to do is post. And my posts can quite easily be simply ignored.

The totally paranoid over reaction is to attempt to justify the prevention of my reasoned views appearing on our forum - as they have done since 1998 - by nonsense assumptions and accusations charged in highly emotive terms about 'flooding' and preventing others from taking part in reasonable discussions by 'crowding' them out by attempts to 'dominate'.

It is pretty clear how all these imposed restrictions will prevent resonable discussion but perhaps someone can explain how simply attempting to post views - (that others appear to wish were not posted) - in any way, shape or form can prevent other posters from taking part in reasonable discussion? For this is the charge.

Do you need to be censored

I don't - do you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 06:51 PM

The Shambles, your posting record shows why you in this position of being limited to one thread on your "pet subject". Comparison with ANY other poster's record will show why you are unique in this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 06:57 PM

[PM] Bert BS: Censorship on Mudcat (1009* d) RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat 06 Feb 05

The only censorship on Mudcat is to delete deliberate personal attacks. If you are the victim of any other kind of censorship send a PM to Joe, Max, Pene or any of the Joe Clones (even me). I assure you that you will receive a reasoned reply.


Well, there are a few other things we delete - racism & hate messages, Spam, copy-paste non-music articles that fill more than one screen - I think that about covers it.
-Joe Offer-


I have asked before who protects us from the abusive personal attacks and offensive name-calling when these are publicly posted by (some of) our 'moderators' and often in editing comments.

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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: curmudgeon
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 07:52 PM

Will you lot please stop picking on Roger. Get off this thread and leave The Shambles ALONE1


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 08:10 PM

Amen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 06 - 09:41 PM

OK then. Bye, Shambles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 02:33 AM

Comparison with ANY other poster's record will show why you are unique in this.

Any comparisons with the posting records of anonymous guests and anonymous 'moderators' are not of course possble. For all the terrible things I am accused of - in reality all I attempt to do is post my honest views under my own name.

Even if I were totally unique in my views - that does not make honourable the many and various attempts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team to actively prevent our forum from seeing these views expressed for discussion where and in the form they were posted.

If nothing changes as a result of my views, requests and suggestion, then my views will remain the same. They are posted under my name to enable any other poster who may wish to - to convince me otherwise. I have read little reasoned discussion and argument that has convinced me but I may yet.

It should be clear by now that no amount of selective restrictions or encouragement of bullying will prevent me trying to see that at least open discussion on this issue can continue. And until Max decides to scrape around to find some reason to ban one of this forum's longer term members and greatest supporters - I will carry on trying to ensure that posting on our forum is encouraged rather than inhibited.

If posters find this tedious, boring, repetitive or judge it not to be to their taste for any reason at all - that is their right. They do have to read or respond to these posts as no one is imposing any measures to force them. My view is that posters should be left to be able to decide for themselves and not denied this choice by the imposed judgement of a fellow poster.

That you may not agree with a poster's moderately expressed views or judge them not to your taste in someway - and no matter what hysteria is generated - this is NOT grounds to censor and attempt to restrict or prevent these views.

Nor is it grounds for posters to be encouraged to support these attempts in public witch-hunts and to post only personal judgements of a fellow poster's worth - as is the example currently set by (some of) those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on their fellow posters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Ennui
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 03:23 AM

Seen one Shambles post, and you've seen them all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 05:07 AM

Seen one Shambles post, and you've seen them all.

That may be so and may well be your honest opinion to which you are entitled to express, having at least been able to see such posts on our forum.

I hope you are not suggesting that this would be grounds to 'silently delete such posts, to close threads and to impose selective posting restrictions - as such actions would only deny any newer poster the opportunity of being able to decide for themselves?

The only one of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's 'trumped-up' charges that would concern me was if there was any truth in the noble-sounding justification given for him 'having' to impose these selective posting restrictions - is that my posts were in any way preventing our forum from conducting reasonable discussion.

It doesn't do any good to discuss any of this with Shambles. He knows the names of all the moderators, and yet he continues to complain about their anonymity. In a three-day period a week or two ago, I transferred all the messages we usually delete into his "closed and deleted" thread, so he and the rest of the world could see a normal sample of what gets deleted. This demonstration didn't satisy Shambles, and he continues to assert that the Mudcat moderators are silently deleting something or another. I guess I have to expect that Shambles will continue to assert that horrible but nonspecific things are happening in secret.

I can't think of how to devise a system that will provide absolute proof that these horrible nonspecific things are NOT being done by Anonymous Fellow Posters. I tried, but he didn't believe me, so it doesn't do any good to discuss anything with him. I guess it's good to just let him continue to believe in these Horrible Nonspecific Things and in his Anonymous Fellow Posters, because it gives meaning and purpose to his life. I do have to limit him to one thread at a time, so the rest of us can actually carry on reasonable discussions. I suppose that since this is "his" topic, this will become "his" thread, and I'll have to close the other one. I'll wait and see what he does.


Can it be explained to our forum how simply attempting to post my views can prevent others from conducting reasonble discussion and how the imposition of 'silent deletion' moving of posts and the closing of threads by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team is somehow making reasonable discussion possible?

If it cannot - can these selective restrictions be lifted and all posters be seen to be treated equally and openly?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Ennui
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 06:49 AM

(o) Yawn, I presume that is more of the same boring rubbish, never read them myself, just the name Shambles at the top of the post stops me going any further.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Ennui 8
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 07:53 AM

I'm Ennui the Eighth I am
Ennui the Eighth I am I am
I got posting in the thread next door
Then remade the point on seven threads more
And every one was Ennui
You couldn't see a difference worth a damn
I'm now going to post in a few threads more
Ennui the Eighth I am ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Grab
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 08:03 AM

I'm prepared to refresh the thread for that - bloody marvellous, Guest! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 12:12 PM

I'm Graham the First I am
Graham the First I am I am
I started the thread next door
And said what I liked on seven threads more
And every personal judgement was encouraged
Not 'silently deleted, or banned
Going to thumb my nose in a few threads more
Graham the First I am ...

In order to protect all parties - can I again request that all posters be seen to be treated equally and openly on our forum by those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on us?

And that all editing comments are seen to be limited to where some form of imposed censorship has actually taken place and that an editing comment is ALWAYS provided to indicate where, why and when such action has been judged necessary?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 01:46 PM

Do you not think that there is rather of lot of fuss being encouraged to be made about posts and threads that so few posters appear to read?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 03:26 PM

I admire your fortitude, Shambles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 06:40 PM

Good for what ails you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 06:41 PM

400 Now close it quick.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 07:59 PM

You are correct, of course. Four hundred posts is a good place to stop.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Sep 06 - 08:29 PM

You are correct, of course. Four hundred posts is a good place to stop.

If you think this - and as no one is forcing you to continue - you are of course free to stop reading and posting to it - then as far as you are concerned - this thread will have stopped.

Perhaps you will accept that if others should wish to continue posting to any thread in your absence that is their choice?

Why should a thread remaining open bother you, or be subject to anyone else's judgement and why do you think you should you be encouraged to deny other posters their choice?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Ennui 1st
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 05:22 AM

What a mealy mouthed pompous parsimonious prig you are Shambles.
Try the Preparation H you pain in the ass!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Grab
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 08:28 AM

Oh well, since we're being musical and requesting equal treatment...

I'm just another Graham I am
Just another Graham I am I am
I read the terms of membership when I came in
It said that if I posted crap it might get binned
So I posted like I'd talk in real life
And others who took advantage got banned
That's their call when the writing's on the wall
Just another Graham I am.

I'm just another Graham I am
Just another Graham I am I am
Max told Roger "you too should head off son
If you don't like the way the Mudcat's run".
But Roger kept the same old thing up
And said in another thread he'd explain
But to my surprise, he cries "I'm victimised"
Just another Graham I am

I'm just another Graham I am
Just another Graham I am I am
When Roger asked us all just what was the score
Me and loads of others told him hundred times or more
But Roger wasn't looking for an answer
His pretence at conversation was a sham
So it's a two-finger sign to that non-stop whine
Just another Graham I am


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 11:29 AM

Someone will be asking for this thread to be moved to the music section if we keep this up.

[PM] Max         Explain the BS rules (52* d)         RE: Explain the BS rules         26 Oct 99

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


Graham - the object of our discussion forum is to enable and encourge discussion. That does not mean that we have to all agree - does it?

Perhaps you would accept that being seen to able to agree to disgree on our forum is a good enough thing to aim for?

Perhaps you would also accept that the 'silent deletion', selective restriction and the imposed closure of threads containing reasonable discussion are not measures likely to encourage reasonable discussion?

Perhaps you would agree that these measures can only inhibit reasonable discussion and that this is the object of these restrictions?

I am a man that is always open to pursuasion and this is best attempted by reasoned discussion. Force, name-calling and witch-hunts - perhaps you would agree, form no part of any kind of reasonable discussion?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 12:54 PM

"I am a man that is always open to pursuasion and this is best attempted by reasoned discussion."


hahhahahahhahha


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 01:11 PM

"pompous parsimonious prig"

Only a pompous parsimonious prig speaks that way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM

Ad astra per aspera


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 01:58 PM

You gotta admit, Roger - that was very funny.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 02:41 PM

The people who come to slag Shambles have the option of going to another thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 02:46 PM

Tried that and he follows people around and pollutes their threads with his paranoid parrot droppings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 02:52 PM

Yes, but this place ain't what it used to be, and never was.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 03:05 PM

What is?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 03:07 PM

Exactly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Sep 06 - 06:17 PM

This place is more like it is now than it ever was before.

besides, Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unmoderated forum, silly idea?
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 02:13 AM

Well I, and many others like its is, and yes occasionally threads are deleted, but by what I have seen moderating it is good,-

I could post that from what I have seen rock chick looks like a blond, 19 year-old supermodel.....But as from what I have seen I have no way of knowing this to be the case - what would be the point of such a post?

Such opinions and judgements made about the current system of censorship on our forum by any poster may be honestly intended but are uninformed. As posters have no way of knowing what the true nature and current level of imposed censorship is.

rock chick - like most of the rest of our forum will not be aware that yesterday an entire thread was deleted. If they are going to be allowed and encouraged by our 'modertors' and are interested enough to post in support of theses measures - perhaps it is only fair that all poster are made aware of what they are, and when and where they are imposed? Which is why I suggest the following.

In order to protect all parties - can I again request that all posters be seen to be treated equally and openly on our forum by those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on us?

And that all editing comments are seen to be limited to where some form of imposed censorship has actually taken place and that an editing comment is ALWAYS provided to indicate where, why and when such action has been judged necessary?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 02:31 AM

Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem

You may or may not be interested to know that an entire thread was deleted yesterday.

Our forum has no idea what the justification would have been given for this action.
Or who was supposed to be protected by it.
Or who was responsible for this action.

As this action is imposed in our name and in order to protect us - perhaps we should be informed when and why any form of imposed censorship takes place?

And perhaps we should not be expected to or be seen to publicly support such actions - until we are informed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 04:07 AM

Warning Missing Messages


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 10:12 AM

A BS thread (called Do you support the status quo?) was deleted yesterday, for reasons unknown and by persons unknown.

Today - 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-


And who (conventionally) posted the following:

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-


As the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has judged (amongst other things) that there was no justification for some other anonymous 'moderator' to delete the first thread – perhaps the better option would have been to return this thread to the BS section and to leave the other one alone, to remain as posted in the music section?

But rather than feeling they 'have' to be seen to be doing something – perhaps it is better that our 'moderators' do nothing and let our forum decide? It certainly would be better if before they decide to impose any action – that they are at least seen to communicate with each other first and prefably first consult with the thread's originator.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unmoderated forum, silly idea?
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 10:18 AM

BS In favour of/Do you support the Status Quo?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unmoderated forum, silly idea?
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 11:10 AM

I shall not sit around silent while some little obsessed wimp in Weymouth or thereabouts conducts a campaign of hatred against people who do a difficult job.
I am not one of your mealy mouthed, wishy washy, sit on the fence liberals, who goes out of their way to make excuses for axe murderers and the like. I call it like I see it, and I am as determined to stop Shambles as he is to stop Joe doing his job.
Yes I have a problem, I have a problem with people like Shambles being allowed to spoil this site for other people, for his being allowed to post his repetitive rubbish in thread after thread, in other words, I want him OUT.

There now, I bet that came as a total surprise to you guest!

Giok

Some posters may be surprised after reading the following: *Smiles*

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1499823

I agree with both the preceeding guests, I have only been around for about 4 years, but in that time I've seen people condemned and castigated for a lot less the Martin Gibson got away with. I was disappointed that Joe Offer seemed to excuse him while on the other hand crossing swords with The Shambles over much less offensive postings. I also found it funny that a lot of people seemed to excuse Martin's behaviour on the grounds that he was pretty knowledgable on some aspects of folk music, and anyway he was being rude mostly below the line, which some seem to regard as 'beyond the pale' anyway. That's a bit like saying you excuse Hitler because he was good with kids. As has been said MG should have been curbed long before he got to be the problem he has to quite a few people, and he did show up a weakness in the policing of this forum that I love.
Giok

The only 'hatred' I see is that now encouraged to be displayed in many of your postings and actions. I have no hatred for anyone posting here and I do not question the good intentions of our 'moderators'. Sadly any suggestions made about how our forum is best 'moderated' now seem to to be taken and defended as if they were all personally motivated attacks on the individuals.

If our 'moderators' want personal conflict on our forum to continue and get even worse - then don't learn from any past lessons and just carry on setting the example of publicly indulging in this conflict and the secrecy and division that goes alongside. But if this is the choice - please don't complain that you have been unable to impose the peace you require, blame everyone else, take no responsibility but just plough on with the same but increased failed measures.

If our 'moderators' feel that they have nothing to hide - then why not show our forum that this is the case by making all imposed editing actions open so they can be seen to be fair? Perhaps it is this - the appearance of 'moderators' being at war with our forum's posters - that is making their role more difficult than it should be?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 11:15 AM

"He has also seen fit to combine the deleted BS thread with this Music thread."

Quite obviously he has seen fit to combine the deleted music thread (obviously started to deliberately cause confusion with the BS thread and not very on-topic for a blues and folk forum) with this BS thread. An entirely different matter.

Don't fuck about, Roger, you did it to deliberately provoke the moderators and I will accept to weasel words of excuse. I may not be a mind-reader but I know what you are doing.

Are you going to accept the site owner's invitation to go or stay and accept the way it is run?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 11:26 AM

Quite obviously he has seen fit to combine the deleted music thread (obviously started to deliberately cause confusion with the BS thread and not very on-topic for a blues and folk forum) with this BS thread.

Paul you have obviously decided that I am the Anti-Christ and seemingly nothing I say will change that judgement. However I will make the effort.

The simple fact was that when I started the 'Status Quo' thread on the music section - the entire 'status quo' thread (with it music-related posts) had been deleted. This without any editing comment of explanation.

That thread was gone and history and there was nothing for it to be confused with - until the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team decided to overule the anonymous moderator's decision (was it you?), combine the dead thread with the Music one and send it to the BS.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unmoderated forum, silly idea?
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM

I shall not sit around silent while some little obsessed wimp in Weymouth or thereabouts conducts a campaign of hatred against people who do a difficult job.
I am not one of your mealy mouthed, wishy washy, sit on the fence liberals, who goes out of their way to make excuses for axe murderers and the like. I call it like I see it, and I am as determined to stop Shambles as he is to stop Joe doing his job.
Yes I have a problem, I have a problem with people like Shambles being allowed to spoil this site for other people, for his being allowed to post his repetitive rubbish in thread after thread, in other words, I want him OUT.

There now, I bet that came as a total surprise to you guest!

Giok


Some posters may be surprised after reading the following: *Smiles*

http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1499823

I agree with both the preceeding guests, I have only been around for about 4 years, but in that time I've seen people condemned and castigated for a lot less the Martin Gibson got away with. I was disappointed that Joe Offer seemed to excuse him while on the other hand crossing swords with The Shambles over much less offensive postings. I also found it funny that a lot of people seemed to excuse Martin's behaviour on the grounds that he was pretty knowledgable on some aspects of folk music, and anyway he was being rude mostly below the line, which some seem to regard as 'beyond the pale' anyway. That's a bit like saying you excuse Hitler because he was good with kids. As has been said MG should have been curbed long before he got to be the problem he has to quite a few people, and he did show up a weakness in the policing of this forum that I love.
Giok


The only 'hatred' I see is that now encouraged to be displayed in many of your postings and actions. I have no hatred for anyone posting here and I do not question the good intentions of our 'moderators'. Sadly any suggestions made about how our forum is best 'moderated' now seem to be taken and defended as if they were all personally motivated attacks on the individuals.

If our 'moderators' want personal conflict on our forum to continue and get even worse - then don't learn from any past lessons and just carry on setting the example of publicly indulging in this conflict and the secrecy and division that goes alongside. But if this is the choice - please don't complain that you have been unable to impose the peace you require, blame everyone else, take no responsibility but just plough on with the same but increased failed measures.

If our 'moderators' feel that they have nothing to hide - then why not show our forum that this is the case by making all imposed editing actions open so they can be seen to be fair? Perhaps it is this - the appearance of 'moderators' being at war with our forum's posters - that is making their role more difficult than it should be?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 01:29 PM

"Are you going to accept the site owner's invitation to go or stay and accept the way it is run?"

The site owner can block Shambles' ability to post. The site owner doesn't. If you do not like what Shambles has to say, stop reading what Shambles has to say. There are about ten people who can't let Shambles be. Get a grip.

Keep saying what you have to say, Shambles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 01:51 PM

And those ten are conspicuous by their absence on the SERIAL BULLY thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM

Why is Shambles allowed to rant in both this thread and the one on mederated groups? I thought that he was limited to one per day?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 03:00 PM

Don't fuck about, Roger, you did it to deliberately provoke the moderators and I will accept to weasel words of excuse. I may not be a mind-reader but I know what you are doing.

Paul - this remains a discussion forum and it is supposed to be fun. As there is no way that one poster can ever know what another's motivation may be - it is perhaps better for us not to follow the example set by (some of) our 'moderators'. That they now to use our forum as a means to judge the worth of their fellow posters and publicly make all manner of assumpions about aspects of named individual posters that they can have no real knowledge of - does not mean that you have to follow this example. And what this sort of thing has to do with 'moderation' - is not clear.

I cannot delete posts or close threads - I can only post and I need to make no excuse to you for what I choose to post. So what is the point of you speculating publicly that I may have 'provoked' our 'moderators' by what I choose to post. The day I tell you what you can post - is the day you can tell me. What you may choose to post is none of my business.

But the you have the chronology wrong. Before that thread was closed - posters there were not provoking anyone, just having fun. Perhaps a