BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 05:30 PM

Score card:

Shambles 5000 Management 100

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 06:23 PM

Just ban him or delete every single complaint posting like other web sites do and there won't be any problems. I belong to other web sites that have moderators that aren't a tenth as lenient as Joe and there aren't any problems. Stick to the theme or away you go. Post an insult to the site owner or moderators and you get a warning. Keep it up and you're out of here. It works most of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 07:39 PM

Shambles is the little kid who whines and nags in the back seat until Mom stops the car and whacks him in an overreaction, then complains and whines louder because he got whacked..."..and I didn't hardly do NOTHIN'!"


Joe admits he sometimes overreacts...Shambles admits nothing.

Remember the lesson in "Moose Turd Pie"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:01 PM

OK, so maybe anger was part of the reason why I moved those Spam messages to the top of this thread. Shambles doubted the existence of the Spam that was the reason for the closure of the previous thread, so I moved those messages here as proof. And yes, I was angry. I think I had a right to be. Nobody likes to be called a liar.

If you volunteer to work in the kitchen - the fact that you may get hot and bothered does not entitle anyone to throw pots and pans at the customers.

Some tasks in life are truly thankless and if you really expect universal thanks for undertaking them - perhaps you are being unrealistic?

No one is forcing anyone to work in the kitchen and if they feel their best efforts are not appreciated - perhaps after all this time it is time to come out of the kitchen?   

Especially as it has already been admitted that these best efforts are ineffective.

As for me calling any poster any names - the record will show that unlike the example set by some of our 'moderators' - I do not post such things (for my detractors could be relied on and would have provided evidence for this).

And the record will also show that I will stick to the discussion and do not respond to provocation or respond in kind to the names that I am called by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, some of the 'moderators and the certain favoured posters.

Those noisy few who unlike me - are not only seen to be free from any posting restrictions if they do post such things - but who are now actively encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, to set the example of posting only such things to our forum.

All the evidence is here - posters can judge for themselves if the assurances given to our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are in fact seen to be honoured.

Or if any apolgy is issued to our forum when an assurance is seen not to be honoured.

The point about any of the 'silent deletion's of posters contributions - be they posts that meet the ever-increasing critria you assure our forum that they must - or when entire threads are deleted when they are seen not to meet the required criteria - is that our forum does not know what the true nature and current level of this 'silent deletion' is - but are expected to support it.

If anyone has any blank cheques like this - they can send them to me.

If all such actions were recorded by editing comments and all editing comments were limited to where action by our 'moderators' had actually been judged necessary - poster to our forum would be able to judge if these actions - imposed on their behalf, in their name and in order to protect them - were proportionate.

Currently our forum is expected to take this on trust - from fellow posters/'moderators' who do not trust our forum enough to operate under their names. I suggest this is too much to reasonably expect.

Perhaps if our 'moderators' were to be seen to operate more fairly, openly, and consistently, to honour all assurances given to our forum and to show more trust and respect for poster's invited contributions - they may then reasonably expect to be trusted more and to shown more respect in return?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:07 PM

You're gonna give Sisyphus a bad name.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:11 PM

Cluin-LOLOL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:41 PM

http://stripe.colorado.edu/~morristo/sisyphus.html

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:43 PM

That's a scene from "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 12:11 AM

Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 12:23 AM

U2h1dHVwIEd1ZXN0DQo=

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 11:45 AM

Guest "Only the lonely"

Please do not mention Dejah Thoris again in relation to a Shambles thread. Her name is still greatly revered!

Yours
JC

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 01:35 PM

If the Martians were oviparous (egg-laying), how come Dejah Thoris had such great tits?

(yeah, I read Burrough's "John Carter of Mars" series when I was a kid too)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 03:33 PM

Even Martians have a better grasp of grammar and syntax than widdle Shamby Pamby. If understandable communication were required for a fuck, this guy would still be a virgin. Hmmmm........Can someone please check on the Shammy homefront and let us know?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Big Mick
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 03:53 PM

Dejah Thoris CLICKY

. I remember when I was a kid, reading about her and touchi....... STOP, Mick. TMI.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:30 PM

It is unwise to go into battle wearing virtually no protective armour or clothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:50 PM

They got it half right, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:59 PM

Amazing how different the experience and the interests of the male and female persuasions. I had never heard of Dejah Thoris. And I see that 'assembly and painting' are required. Be still, my heart!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:10 PM

Frazetta did the best paintings IMO. Example here.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:12 PM

'nother

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:13 PM

Last.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:48 PM

I guess it's warm where she is.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:49 PM

Look more closely . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 06:02 PM

Edgar Rice Burroughs? Hmmmmm

When I was a kid, parents bemoaned the reading of comic books. Maybe they had seen a few of these depictions?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:11 PM

Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote for the young male audience, Ebbie. Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, and various other spectacular tales of derring-do. They're great adventure books to read when you're about 14 or 15. I don't think he envisioned Dejah Thoris being quite as skimpily clad as she is now depicted...although fairly close to that, perhaps. I doubt he would have illustrated her bare-breasted. Barsoomian (Martian) women tended to dress in a combination of jewelery and fetching garments, revealing a fair bit, but not looking like an act at the local strip club, I don't think. And Dejah was a princess. Royalty has to come up to a certain mark of dignity and public respect.

The books were marvelously imaginative, but they are badly dated now. They reflect social attitudes from a bygone era, when the great British Empire was still the premier power in the world, and beautiful women swooned at the least excuse, and lay panting and disheveled on the decks of pirate ships and in the dank courtyards of lost cities, waiting, hoping against hope, for their bronzed, tall, dark hero to leap over the rail and slaughter the vile despicable criminally insane wretches who were at that very moment closing in on them, grinning evily, licking their lips, and contemplating forcing their unspeakable intentions upon the fair white palpitating skin of...

(you get the idea...?)

Dejah was pretty feisty, though. She was Barsoomian after all, and Barsoomian princesses can use a sword.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:15 PM

Weren't the stories originally serials in pulp mags. They seemed pretty disposeable.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:20 PM

And of course the lower gravity on Mars ensured Dejah Thoris's fun bags would stay (in the words of Bob Seger) "way up, firm and high" longer than on ponderous old Terra.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:24 PM

Yeah, they were serials in pulp magazines, and they followed the pattern of the time. But E.R.B.'s sheer sense of imagination was not easy to match. He created a marvelous idea with the Tarzan stories, one that has far outlived its creator, and his Martian world was equally memorable.

It's true about Martian gravity. Very good for maintaining perky uplift, I should think. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that Ms. Thoris normally kept her breasts covered in public.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:45 PM

It wasn't her breasts that took me aback.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 08:39 PM

Geeziz Ebbie, if your breasts are on the back, you really are gettin' old. I assume that's in the prone position? I mean upright I would think it's more to the knees.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 09:48 PM

hhahahha On the other hand (side?) I remember when I was a kid that there was a woman in church whose breasts did rest on the belt at her waist. She had had many children, breastfed them all and I think it is safe to say that she did NOT wear a bra. (Her belt would have had to have pockets. Big pockets.)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 10:13 PM

Shambles.

Read "Moby Dick".

What will your epitaph say when you die?

"He tirelessly fought for his rights on an obscure folk website and would not give up till his last breath."

What will your CV say

...

Employment history

2006-2007 - fought long and bitter battle over dispute concerning what constituted acceptable practice on an internet chat forum.


You may be psychologically sound now, but if you carry on with this one much longer you will begin to damage yourself.

I would honestly describe continuing to put yourself in a position where you are subjecting yourself to some of the more caustic views here as a form of voluntary self abuse.

There are compulsive abusers and compulsive abusees.

And there are issues that really don't matter, but that will affect your self esteem and happiness if you allow them to take over your life.

Take a few weeks out where you don't add to any more of this nonsense and if you find there is a hole in your life and a yearning to get back into the fray, it could be that you are attempting to fulfil some deeper need and that it is worth closing yourself off from it for a while.

You don't need this. It isn't as important as you are treating it.

Let go :')

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 10:35 PM

Well lox, that one ought to generate an interesting reply. What makes all of this so much fun and so totally ludicrous is that it really doesn't matter for the most part. The only part that does is what Max has put into this place over the past 10+ years and his collaboration with Dick and Susan. Roger has no real interest in the community aspect that Max has promulgated and allowed to grow here.

What makes this sad is that in some respects Roger is very talented but instead of asking Max how he can help, he beats him up and tells him what he thinks has been done poorly. He is a wimp with a computer and without the balls to get really involved in what it would take for him to be a valuable part of this place instead of the common dipshit that he is.

Max and Jeff have many hours and much sweat invested in keeping the place going and trying to perfect some improvements before they redo much more. They have been doing that while trying to lead their real lives outside of the 'Cat which have not always been smooth. Roger has no respect for any of it or anything they do and THAT tends to piss me off. So I take it out for laughs at Pamby's expense. Fuck him! I'm having a good time!!! He shows no respect...he gets none.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:24 AM

It is sad to see a few posters, who in other aspects of their lives would challange double standards - hypocrisy - unfairness - secrecy, open displays of bullying - insulting and abusive behaviour - heavy-handed general and petty pendantry - the encouragement minding of everyone elses's business - needless anonymimity and the introduction of any silly restrictions on the right of people to express their views freely etc - being compromised into being seen to be in support of such things being practiced on our forum. And being practiced in their name and on their behalf...........

It is probably just as sad not to see very many posters having the courage to point out that personalising these issues and encouraging witch-hunts against individual posters - who honestly try to express their views despite all of the varous attempts to prevent it - will not make the issues go away.

It is sad that it has come to this. But when people in privileged postions are seen to abuse these privileges and use them to engage publicly in personally motivated disputes whilst claiming not to be - the end result is as inevitable as it is undesirable and distasteful.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:38 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

As if it mattered - I am a very nice person - even when shown little respect and even when I see others treated with no little respect.

When I am shown respect and when I see others treated with respect I will be even a nicer person.

But even if I were not a nice person - perhaps I would still have certain rights?

Is it only nice people - like my few noisy detractors - who post insulting personal comments, name-call and encourage others to post such things?   

When the good guys are seen to adopt all of the worst traits of the bad guys - in gets a bit diffcult to tell the difference.

Perhaps now there is no difference and those who would consider themselves to be the good guys on our forum are now the bad guys?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 03:09 AM

"It is probably just as sad not to see very many posters having the courage to point out that personalising these issues and encouraging witch-hunts against individual posters - who honestly try to express their views despite all of the varous attempts to prevent it - will not make the issues go away."

What about witch hunts against moderators?
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 05:22 AM

What about witch hunts against moderators?

What about it?

If such a thing were the case or was even possible for one individual poster - would it be the sensible option for 'moderators' to publicly been seen to use their priviged position to indulge in a long-running counter-attack on individual named posters in return?

And to been seen to openly encourage certain other posters in posting the sort of abusive name-calling posts that our forum has always been informed that our 'moderators' are supposed to be there to protect us from (rather than set the example of indulging in it themselves)?

No - even after being subjected to all of this - there is little persoanal emnity towards any 'moderator' on my part. The so-called 'vendetta' often referred to by my detractors - is only on their part.

I simply and honestly believe that people should always be seen to be treated fairly and I will not be seen to be compromised into supporting anything other than this - just because it may be my 'friend' who is attempting to compromise me by asking me to accept the unacceptable.

A true 'friend' is perhaps someone who will respect you and your principles enough - never to attempt compromise you?

What is being evidenced is that what our 'moderators' assure our forum is happening in regard to closed threads and deleted posts - is not actually the case and that poster are being compromised into supporting double standards of posting behaviour and blatent hypocrisy practiced in their name - in the pretence that this is showing fairness.

This from a poster that has nothing but support and the best opinion of what our forum is supposed to be - not from a poster who wishes anything negative towards the fine opportunity that Max has presented us ALL with. But just think of the ammunition that this show of hypocrisy from our 'moderators' is providing to those few who really do not have our forum or Max's interest at heart.

The thread that was closed will show an asurance given to our forum about the criteria required for one's post to be 'silently deleted.

But that assurance is shown to be worthless as that thread also evidences two threads that did not meet the required criteria but never-the less, these two threads - along with all of the posts - were deleted by persons unknown and for reasons unknown. These were both restored later - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - as he judged these threads did not meet his required criteria.

Also evidenced there - was another thread, that along with an unknown number of other posters - both Wolfgang and I had posted to. This thread has vanished without trace and has not been restored and it is not clear if this thread met the required criteria or not.

That thread will show that another post of over 300 posts was first closed and then entirely deleted. If any of these 300 posts did meet the required criteria - pehaps it would have been proportionate to have just deleted these?

The reasons for the closing of the original 'Closed thread & deleted posts' thread itself has been covered in this one. A thread of nearly 2000 posts is closed because our 'moderators' do not seem able to delete only the offending posts - but the original thread remains closed - even when the spam posts that were claimed to be the reason for its closure - are then posted into this one. A case of our 'modreators' having more use for the bathwater than the baby.

Apart from all that - it is pretty obvously that the personally motivated actions ans special posting restrictions placed on one individual named poster for trying to discuss these issues - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team can be seen not to be doing anyone on our forum any good. And poster being seen to support them, even by saying nothing, can only harm our forum. You may not have the chance if you leave it any later.

You may support them as such - but I suggest this is foolish as it may be your turn to be the next victim.

But can we all just stop the pretence that these actions are anything other than needlessly divisive and the blatent abuse of privilege that they plainly are?

And can our forum just be allowed to freely discuss this?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 07:38 AM

Wow.....Shamby, you're getting even more verbose with major grammatical and spelling errors over posts that you say you ignore. I really like the mix and match game you play with different tenses in the same sentence.

BTW.....Anything you say about "our forum" and having the interests of Max at heart is obviously total bullshit. Even the dimmest of bulbs who has been reading these threads realizes you don't. Poor widdle Pamby can't be any nicer until he's treated nicer.......ahhhhhh.........poor widdle pissant. F**k you.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 10:58 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

If a poster is concerned about unfair treatment being shown by 'moderators' on our forum - the sensible and logical thing to do (for the benefit of us all) would be seen to address any unfairness.

Not here - as the only response - our 'moderators' just continue to plainly demonstrate forum exactly how increasingly unfair this treatment is?

Whilst at the same time giving assurances to our forum that this treatment is not at all personally motivated and unfair......And seemingly expecting posters to accept this as being true.

Our forum deserves better than this.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:10 AM

No, no Pamby......YOU need to do a lot better by Max. YOU need to take all your grievances to Max by PM. YOU need to do what Max has asked. YOU need to apologize to Max for your vendetta against him.

........and I thought you said you weren't bothered?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:12 AM

Max has said before that he will not discuss this sort of issue in the forum or help forum. It needs to be taken to private discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:54 AM

But even if I were not a nice person - perhaps I would still have certain rights?

What is expected is that all aspects of this issue can be seen to be freely discussed.

Like all posters - if Max wishes to join the discussion - perhaps he has that right and if he does not wish to join the discussion no one is forcing him or anyone else to join in.

No one is being forced to even open these threads - especially those who post and refresh them only to pass personal judgements of the participants. But a few favoured posters are now openly encouraged by our 'moderators' to feel they have some right to try and prevent, certain discussions from being freely conducted.

Perhaps if our 'moderators' did not feel they had some right to make public any criticism, and speculation about the possible motives individual named posters and reveal to our forum assumptions and details about them which perhaps they should not reveal in public - calls for what are described by our 'moderators' as 'complaints' to be taken up privately would have more credibilty?

Complaints from posters about what other posters choose to post - in order that action is imposed upon them - are now encouraged on our forum and Snitchers Corner (The Mudcat help and Trouble Forum only seems to cater for such complaints.

But anything that may even look like a complaint about the posts of ours that our 'moderators' choose to 'silently delete' are viewed by our 'moderators' and their few vocal supporters as unacceptable.

As it is - such things simply demonstrate the double standards that our forum is now expected to unquestionably accept (and many posters appear to be prepared to).

For there are no calls for compliments about the conduct of our 'moderators' to be made privately or to be restricted to only one thread - are there?

Until there are - I will continue to try to discuss issues that are of concern to all posters - in public on our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:57 AM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:00 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are there are calls for compliments about the conduct of our 'moderators' to be made privately or to be restricted to only one thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:06 PM

What do the two statements about have to do with each other?

the owner of the site - by whose permission you post at all, has requested that discussion of the topic so dear to your heart be conducted in private. since you have refused to take anyone elses answer to your questions it seems that is the only polite option left to you - however to expect you to be polite given your conduct ovber the past few years is futile.

g'nite

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:12 PM

the owner of the site - by whose permission you post at all, has requested that discussion of the topic so dear to your heart be conducted in private.

Perhaps you could inform our forum exactly where the owner of the site has made such a request?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:14 PM

check your own posts - you have qouted it several times.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:19 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are a few favoured posters now openly encouraged by our 'moderators' to feel they have some right to try and prevent, certain discussions from being freely conducted?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:23 PM

The last time you and I were actually discussing the original topic we had reached the point of your admitting that you understood the following:

1) the site, including the forum, is privately owned by Max.

2) Max has the right to delete, edit, modify, move, etc. any posting or thread.

The next point that needs to be clarified (to ensure everyone is speaking from the same point and concepts) is proxy. Do You understand proxy?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:27 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are complaints from posters about what other posters choose to post - in order that action is imposed upon them - now encouraged on our forum and Snitchers Corner?

MMario - you may not like what the truth is - but it is as well to accept it as being the truth - rather than to try and keep up the pretence that it is something else.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:33 PM

still no desire to discuss the original subject I see. bye.