|
16 Apr 07 - 01:09 PM (#2027005) Subject: Members, Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Sandra I have read countless times on Mudcat that guests should not be allowed to post. If lots of members are using all sorts of names except their real ones and guest are doing the same - whats the difference. I don't understand, I'm not trying to start an argument. I would like to know as I am thinking about becoming a member. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:23 PM (#2027021) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Danny Boy The pipes the pipes are calling . . . . |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:24 PM (#2027022) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,The other Danny Boy from glen to glen |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:24 PM (#2027026) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,the OTHER other Danny Boy and even from Seamus to Seamus |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:24 PM (#2027027) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST I'm the No-name guest |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:25 PM (#2027028) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: Bee Sandra, I don't mind guests at all - I was one for a long time, but some Mudcatters are understandably annoyed that guests and members posing as guests can post trollishly. Really, I'd say it's members pretending to be strangers, who know many of the regular posters, and just post as guests in order to bait or play pranks or act offensively that are the problem. Personally, I think they can be put up with, as many real guests drop in and are informative and delightful, sometimes they are musicians who have been discussed, or children of long passed song writers, for example. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:25 PM (#2027029) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: John MacKenzie I think that sort of covers it Sandra. G. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:30 PM (#2027033) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: Leadfingers Postings from members can be replied to by a Personal Message , while postings from Guests can ONLY be responded to in the forum , which is why there are the Unpleasant Altercations in the threads on occasions ! |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM (#2027034) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: Jean(eanjay) Don't let it put you off becoming a member. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:48 PM (#2027051) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: pdq There is a great deal of support for banning guests from starting threads. Much less support when it comes to banning guests from posting on existing threads. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 01:49 PM (#2027052) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Sandra Thanks Leadfingers, what sort of personal information is available about members? |
|
16 Apr 07 - 03:59 PM (#2027166) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: wysiwyg ...what sort of personal information is available about members? Only what they choose to reveal. And there's been no spam from joining. If you have other specific concerns, let us know and we can address them one by one. ~Susan |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:02 PM (#2027170) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: Les from Hull Members can put information about themseleves (or not bother). It's in the 'quck links'. One problem with guests not being able to start threads means that it wouldn't be so easy for people to ask the question that we are often so good at answering. Besides, some of us enjoy bashing the trolls! |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:05 PM (#2027174) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,meself Ouch! Not so hard! |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:10 PM (#2027183) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: Amos SO far, the only solution that makes strong sense to me is th esystem of having a published code of conduct, and weeding out the worst of the violations thereto. If Guests were prohibited from initiating BS threads, they could still post music questions. But the antisocial out there would probably then clutter up the music threads with BS whihc was what we tried to cure by splitting the BS threads in the first place. A |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:13 PM (#2027189) Subject: RE: Members Verses Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Sandra Bee and Les from Hull I have seen trolls mentioned a couple of times before. Is that slang for guests? |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:29 PM (#2027206) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Bill D no...'troll' is an internet word for those who start discussions which are INTENDED to cause uproar & argument. Some people do it intentionally and carefully, some just thrive on 'hot' topics and baiting others. Trolls are 'often' anonymous, but sometimes just don't care. Members here often use names which reveal nothing about their real identity, but still are regular, honest folks. I sometimes don't even know if they are male or female/ |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:33 PM (#2027207) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Bill D the problem with trolls, if not monitored, is that one person can even take 2 sides of an argument and 'seed' the discussion with remarks designed to provoke & cause problems. The management can monitor most such individuals thru technology, and has recently been deleting a lot of posts from 'guests' who DO NOT SIGN posts consistently. We'd like to have Sandra as a member..*smile*....but so far, 'guest' Sandra is fine, as long as you remember to sign posts. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:36 PM (#2027212) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Crane Driver Not at all, Sandra. Many guests are welcome. Trolls are people (not necessarily guests) who deliberately post inflammatory or contentious messages with the intent of causing arguments amongst other posters. Sometimes the same person will post under several 'guest' names, apparently arguing with him/herself to keep the pot boiling. The intent appears to be to cause as much damage as possible to the forum and to other posters, presumably for fun. I guess the same motive lies behind many of the viruses and other malicious code people send through the internet. Some people just can't stand to see others enjoying themselves. Andrew |
|
16 Apr 07 - 04:46 PM (#2027222) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Herga Kitty Sandra - it does help if you give a clue to which guest you are - otherwise you can end up with threads where different guests post anonymously just as "Guest", and it gets a bit confusing as to which message came from which guest! I don't think people should have to join just to ask questions, but it does also help if they check whether the questions have been asked before by using the Digitrad forum and discussion search facility. Kitty |
|
16 Apr 07 - 05:14 PM (#2027248) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Azizi "I don't think people should have to join just to ask questions, but it does also help if they check whether the questions have been asked before by using the Digitrad forum and discussion search facility." I recall when I was a guest how afraid I was to jump into conversations {"Conversations" is how I like to think of the threads}. When I was a guest, I didn't have a clue what the Digitrad forum and discussion search facility} were. Furthermore, I didn't know how to use those features. I don't think that guests should lurk until they figure out how to use the DT or the search feature. Also, the search feature still has real glitches in it so if you put in a key word or phrase, it's not certain that you will find the thread you're looking for-and the message you get when you click on that line is still not the right message. All this to say, that I would prefer that Mudcat continues to allow guests-using a consistent name-to post in the music/folk culture section and the BS section. Yes, there are problems with trolls, but I think Mudcat will lose more than we gain if we disallow guest posting. I also don't think that it's any big deal if guests ask questions that have previously been asked. Those questions and the subsequent comments have the potential of yielding new insights and additional information. To guest Sandra and other guests, I join with others in inviting you to join Mudcat. Best wishes, Azizi |
|
16 Apr 07 - 05:31 PM (#2027262) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Stilly River Sage I've recently joined a different, unrelated discussion list where membership is mandatory. The moniker used is usually something clever but not a name, or if it is a name, it is just one part. Like Mudcat, others know only as much as you want them to. I have found that site to be a pleasure to peruse and contribute to, because there isn't the sniping and trolling that turns up so often here. Mudcat requires a tougher hide, if you plan to stick with it, because chances are really good that you're going to offer a personal view on something that will catch the eye of or upset one of the trolls who will attempt to derail the discussion, effectively bringing the subject of the conversation around to them and their behavior. This is its own reward for such sociopaths. In addition to a few guests, we've had some really obnoxious members. Martin Gibson, Gargoyle, and ClintonHammond are three I know of who have been banned. There are others who left before my time. For all I can tell, they're the ones behind the obnoxious guests who come in with various guest IDs (or not) these days. It is important that those considering joining be able to look around and talk to others. My advice is to go ahead and take the plunge. You can leave if you decide it doesn't fit. I'd prefer that all who join discussions here be members. SRS |
|
16 Apr 07 - 05:31 PM (#2027263) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Geordie-Peorgie Just like Azizi, aah was scared te put me five penn'orth in and aah had nee clue aboot the Digitrad However, Sandra, if there's summat ye aren't sure about, aall ye hev te dee is ask (like what aah did) and these lovely people will flock te help. Occasionally they will pick you up on your punctuation, spellin', facts and aall sorts of other things, but it aall helps. Eventually, like me, you might veven attend a 'gather' just to put names to faces - THEN you'll find oot warra lovely bunch of people ye've got yoursel' mixed up with. Gan on, Pet! Ye knaah ye want te join us, really |
|
16 Apr 07 - 06:04 PM (#2027295) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Slag Gee, I've been reading the descriptions of trolls with great interest and the thing that really dawned on me is how much said goblins resemble--- LAWYERS!!! It's like, "Let's you and him fight!" All except for the part about anonymity. With a "Nom de Internet" you can't tell a gnome from a troll from a lawyer!!! (Hmmmm, I wonder, was that a trollish thing to say?") |
|
16 Apr 07 - 06:56 PM (#2027335) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Herga Kitty Sorry, I was just trying to be helpful from my own experience of past threads, didn't mean to intimidate any new guest.... K |
|
16 Apr 07 - 07:34 PM (#2027354) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Azizi Herga Kitty, I didn't think that was your intention. And I don't think that a guest would or should hesitate to join because of what you said. What I meant to convey was that posting on the Internet and joining a community of folks who I don't know was intimidating to me. But, I've come a long way from that-and though there's been some bumps in the road here or there- I can definitely say that joining Mudcat has been worth it. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 07:39 PM (#2027355) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Joe Offer, at the Women's Center Hi, Sandra - the FAQ (click) (frequently asked questions) page has this information: Thread #19340 Message #1931671 Posted By: Joe Offer 09-Jan-07 - 03:36 PM Thread Name: Mudcat FAQ - Newcomer's Guide Subject: Anonymous Posting From now on, anonymous posting will be watched and controlled. We've had far too many problems with anonymous posters. If you want to post, use a consistent name. We're not requiring registration, although we certainly prefer that. You may certainly use a pseudonym as a user name, but please use that same name every time you post. -Joe Offer- |
|
16 Apr 07 - 08:02 PM (#2027368) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: GUEST,Sandra thanks Joe - I hadn't realised that the same name should be used until a couple of days ago. I will check out the FAQ tomorrow. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 08:19 PM (#2027383) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: artbrooks And, as has been said, PLEASE join the happy throng. We range from serious musicians to academic folklorists to dilettantes to content members of the designated audience (moi!). We are heavily USian-UKish-Aussie-Canadian, but have active members from Iceland, Germany, Belgium, China and other places...but one thing many of us are is highly opinionated and not terribly shy. I can't remember if Guests can access the member profile information or not, but that is where "personal" stuff is stored - and I'll guess that less than a quarter of the membership have anything there. Names are a matter of personal preference - mine is my real name, I'm in Albuquerque and I'm in the phone book. Other people prefer to use a hobby, a nickname, a physical description of them self, or who knows what...all that is asked is that you (mostly) use the same name all the time. Advantages of membership? Well, you get access to the live chatroom, which can be fun, and gives you a chance to get better acquainted with those of us who hanbg out there. You get to be in the annual "Secret Santa" exchange (which isn't quite as silly as it sounds), and where you can log out and log back in as "sorcha's secret santa" and bug the heck out of whoever you have drawn. Jump on in - you'll enjoy yourself. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 08:45 PM (#2027403) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Sorcha Art, you may now make that "Weirdness" Secret Santa! LOL! (see help forum for the reference) |
|
16 Apr 07 - 09:13 PM (#2027418) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Bee-dubya-ell As pointed out above, you don't have to reveal anything factual about yourself to become a member. The form asks for a name and email address, but it's not one of those "we'll send your password to that email address" type deals like some forums have. You don't have to give your real name, you choose your own password, and the email address is strictly as a means of contact if you ever forget your password. If you're sure you're not going to forget it, there's no need to even use a legitimate address. Technical issues like not being able to log in from work or library computers aside, I don't see any good reason why anyone who is willing to play by the rules and use a consistent GUEST name doesn't just go ahead and become a member. Having to remember to type in a name every time you post has gotta be a hassle. |
|
16 Apr 07 - 09:16 PM (#2027421) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Thomas the Rhymer Though I did sign in as 'GUEST Corrigo' and "GUEST New Guy" a couple of times, I do not have any other 'monikers' here at mudcat, and I don't 'sign in' as GUEST. To me, it's a matter of principle. The cowardly flames and sleezy slimes that infest the internet are largely the result of posting with anonymity, and this benefits only the powers in this world that thrive on dividing the people. As to your excellent point, Sandra, about whether there is any difference between anonymous guests and members that post under different names and characters... I'd say... 'not much'. Though there may be more 'craft' involved in maintaining consistent 'personality disorders'... the end result of such a contrast would be to exchange or compare disingenuity with sociopathic cowardice. The internet still has a lot of growing up to do... ttr |
|
17 Apr 07 - 01:21 AM (#2027529) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Non de Plumes From: Joe Offer I watch Guest posts fairly closely, and I can tell you that very few registered members get involved in the game of using multiple identities at Mudcat. The vast majority use the same name every time. Interestingly, the ones who complain that other Mudcatters switch identities "all the time," are mostly those few people who do it themselves. -Joe Offer- |
|
17 Apr 07 - 06:34 AM (#2027621) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Nom de Plumes From: Crane Driver Bee-Dubya I've never had any problems logging in from libraries, internet cafes or anywhere else, though if the computers are set up to disallow cookies that would stop it. It's advisable to log out afterwards though. Andrew (logged in at work) |
|
17 Apr 07 - 07:26 AM (#2027663) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Nom de Plumes From: Azizi I would like to clarify that when I wrote that I was afraid of posting on the Internet, I was not referring to a fear of being ridiculed or insulted by persons who posted on this forum. Instead, I was fearful of my ability to communicate effectively and I was intimidated by how much I thought that I didn't know and how much I actually didn't know about folk music and blues. Furthermore, I was aware that anything I wrote on this forum could be and probably would be viewed by large numbers of people throughout the world. And I was aware that a record of what I said would be at least potentially available for years and years and years. In essence, I doubted myself much more than I was afraid of the reactions of people who posted here. The first time that I found this site, I had so little experience with Internet message boards/discussion forums that I didn't "get" that you had to click on the subject line to read the messages about the topics listed. I looked at the site, and shrugging my shoulders I quickly left. But for some reason, I kept Mudcat's Internet address. And two years later, with more Internet surfing experience under my belt {or under my fingers ??} I came back to Mudcat. After lurking for a month, I took the plunge and jumped into a conversation that I felt confident that I knew something about {a thread on the song "Kumbayah"}. I posted a brief, pointed comment as a guest on that thread. And frankly, because I knew what I knew what I knew, I wasn't concerned if people posting to that thread disagreed with me. And that realization, that acknowledgement to myself that I had something of value to share with others was a huge part of what caused me to conquer my fear of writing on the Internet. What also helped me get over my fear of posting on this forum was the nature of the responses that I received from folks whose conversation I had joined. I didn't know what to expect when I moved from "listener" [reader] to "talker" {poster}. Because I felt so strongly about the subject matter, I admit that I probably would have been through with Mudcat-at least until the next time I got up enough nerve to post-if my comment was ignored or if no one on that thread had agreed with my position. I'm glad that didn't happen. As it turned out, three people who were part of that conversation immediately responded favorably to my comment, and then wrote on tht thread encouraging me to join this forum. And I did so. In my two years of posting to this forum, I have learned alot about a host of subjects, and I have learned alot about myself. And I absolutely do not regret my decision to join this forum. I encourage those people who may be reading this comment to take the plunge and post on Mudcat. If you have something that you feel is worthy of sharing, we want to hear it, and discuss it, and learn from it-even if we-or some of us-may disagree with it. If you like play on words, and like to be witty, show us what you've got. Many of us enjoy those kinds of posts too. If you're not ready to join yet, stick around and read. Then try posting on these threads-and yes, please use a consistent name so we can get to know you. Get to know Mudcat members and Mudcat consistent guests from our postings. Have confidence in what you can share. And at some point now or later, even if you don't think you're ready, take the plunge and post. You'll be glad you did. |
|
17 Apr 07 - 09:54 AM (#2027780) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Nom de Plumes From: GUEST,Russ I was expecting another GUEST-bashing. Imagine my surprise. I'll repeat what I've said many time before. (You could look it up.) The mudcat policy regarding GUEST postings is fine just the way it is. Works for me. Russ (Permanent GUEST) |
|
17 Apr 07 - 10:31 AM (#2027805) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Nom de Plumes From: Stilly River Sage I guess Azizi did decide to stick around--5084 posts later she's still going strong! (I just had a quick peek back at her first post, and as is the case here at Mudcat, found that to be an interesting and still viable thread to bring back to the top.) SRS (with 12,994 posts!--where did the time go?) |
|
17 Apr 07 - 12:03 PM (#2027868) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Nom de Plumes From: bubblyrat Gosh !! It suddenly changed from "Non de Plumes " to "Nom de Plumes "------How terribly clever of it !! Although it should still, I think , be "Noms de Plume " ( ask a Canadian !! ). |
|
17 Apr 07 - 12:13 PM (#2027871) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Jean(eanjay) You're right, bubblyrat. |
|
17 Apr 07 - 12:37 PM (#2027892) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: artbrooks Oh no...we are encouraging people to have only one name!! |
|
17 Apr 07 - 12:38 PM (#2027894) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Leadfingers I have just checked , and Guests CAN access the Members Info page ! Though it hasnt been updated for a while - And NO -That was NOT a criticism ! |
|
17 Apr 07 - 12:48 PM (#2027904) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Sandra Non, Nom or Noms? I never mastered English so I have no chance with French. I did however look this up (on the Internet) before I posted and found it spelt all three ways. Obviously only one was correct but I had no idea which one. Thanks eanjay and bubblyrat. |
|
17 Apr 07 - 01:07 PM (#2027918) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: PoppaGator All this talk about "GUEST"s, but no one has addressed Sandra's objection to our fake names ~ noms de plume. My first few posts here were identified as "GUEST, Tom Henehan" ~ I didn't hesitate to post my real name. When I was eventually encouraged to join, I was specifically encouraged to adopt a "Mudcat name," and I followed the recommendation and did so. I do use my real name (usually without a word-space: TomHenehan) just about everywhere else where I belong to a forum or listserve or whatever, but it's kind of fun to be just a little bit more mysterious and use a pseudonym here in this one little corner of cyberspace Having a clear identity attached to each post is helpful to readers, so they can follow the conversation with better understanding. There are many threads (especially in the "BS" section, and especially on the most controversial topics) where there are multiple unidentified guests, and it can become very confusing when you can't tell one GUEST from another, and/or can't tell whether multiple "GUEST" messages are from the same person or two or more different individuals. You don't have to know the people's real names to sort this stuff out. But it really helps to be able to differentiate person "A" from person "B." Shifting to another subtopic, I have no objection at all to anyone (stranger, new member, not-so-new member, whoever) asking a question that has already been answered. Threads that address such questions only bore me insofar as they consist of ill-tempered responses advising the newbie to "look it up and leave us alone!" I enjoy these rehashings of previously-discussed topics when they resurrect an interesting question that I might never have asked myself, but whose answer turns out to be fascinating. At the very least, references (ideally, links) to the past discussion(s) that the questioner "should have" looked up often engage my interest. And there are very many instances when someone has something new to contribute ~ even if the topic had been addressed in the past, it usually was not totally exhausted within the earlier discussion, and someone always seems to offer something new and interesting (even if it's just that one person's quirky opinion). |
|
18 Apr 07 - 10:35 AM (#2028890) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Stilly River Sage I preferred to use a regional moniker recognizable to those who live in that area, and I chose one that doesn't have an apparent gender attached. There are frequently discussions underway in which assumptions are made regarding your position if your gender is apparent. I prefer to sidestep those assumptions. SRS |
|
18 Apr 07 - 11:49 AM (#2028981) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST PoppaGator - I didn't object to fake names. I just wanted to know what all the kerfuffle was about - as most people (members and guests) are not using their proper names they are not identifiable. I understand now that a lot of the upset is caused by people using different names and members trying to guess who has posted. Thank you to everyone who has contributed so far – it's been most helpful. |
|
18 Apr 07 - 11:53 AM (#2028987) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D *grin*...and you forgot to sign in. *tsk*....see how easy it is to be confusing when you are not registered? |
|
18 Apr 07 - 12:42 PM (#2029027) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Sandra Oh blimey - I really will have to register. Must think of a name first though. |
|
18 Apr 07 - 12:56 PM (#2029038) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos |
|
18 Apr 07 - 12:59 PM (#2029042) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Terry K I've asked the question before, but never had an answer, regarding computers like this one that are accessible to other people. If I forget to log out each time, I run the risk that somebody else could post under my login, hence under my name, rather than under a GUEST name of his choosing or whatever. (In fact, this could even be him writing this now!). It's no big deal to me as I don't suppose any harm could come of it, but it does beg the question of how we should "manage" our membership, or our Guestship. I've chosen simply to not login as I can't trust myself to remember to logout, and I do know other people post to Mudcat from here. cheers, Terry |
|
18 Apr 07 - 01:25 PM (#2029074) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: PoppaGator PoppaGator - I didn't object to fake names. I just wanted to know what all the kerfuffle was about - as most people (members and guests) are not using their proper names they are not identifiable. I'm just as "identifiable" under the fake name I gave myself as under the real name my parents gave me, am I not? In fact, I am arguably more identifiable among this group as PoppaGator than I am as Tom Henehan. As far as I know, nobody who is a regular member or a frequent lurker at mudcat.org ever knew me in the real world under my real name before they encountered me here. You, for example, have absolutely no acquaintance with Tom Henehan, but you may have had the opportunity to read a few posts from PoppaGator and begun to form an idea of who that person might be. I have "met" and learned what to expect from such individuals as Stilly River Sage, Leadfingers, Bee-dubya-ell, Little Hawk, Martin Gibson, etc. etc., etc., just as I have gotten to know, for example, Joe Offer (a real name, I assume) and Bill D (part of a real name), and others. On the other hand, I never seem able to get a handle on just who any given GUEST might be. |
|
18 Apr 07 - 02:28 PM (#2029120) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer Yeah, Joe Offer is a real name, although some have doubted it on occasion. A real estate lady offered to marry me once - she thought she could make big bucks with her first name and my surname. -Joe- |
|
18 Apr 07 - 02:56 PM (#2029153) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos Her first name was "Better" or "Accepted" or "Lower"? A |
|
18 Apr 07 - 02:58 PM (#2029156) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST confusing...? all the posts seem very coherent and the thread of discussion is easy to follow, so..... |
|
18 Apr 07 - 03:38 PM (#2029206) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: wysiwyg ...A real estate lady offered to marry me once - she thought she could make big bucks with her first name and my surname [Offer]. Bitsy! Her name had to be Bitsy. Or Dinkie. ~S~ |
|
18 Apr 07 - 03:43 PM (#2029210) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos "Counter", perhaps. Or "Mekan". Or Gimiyan. Or Wah-Tsur. A |
|
18 Apr 07 - 03:44 PM (#2029212) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: bobad Megan? |
|
18 Apr 07 - 04:43 PM (#2029266) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: catspaw49 Hi Sandra....I started using this handle about 9 years ago when I first got on the net and when I first came to the 'Cat. My name is really Pat Patterson but under Spaw here you can find not only that but the better part of my life's history, my thoughts on just about any damn thing and even some really gross stuff regarding my health. You see, not too long after I came here I ran into some serious near-death health issues and the folks I had met here were vital in helping me pull through. I've had several others since then and everytime I can count on my fellow 'Catters. My point is that we all have gotten to know each other over the years and this is a friendly place. In the past couple of years we've also had a lot of growth that has sadly attracted some slimey jerks and the like who have as their main goal, making trouble, trolling, flaming, complaining, etc.Try to just ignore them and enjoy what the site has to offer which is a bit of a cyber-village atmosphere and a lot of good music and fun. WELCOME TO THE MUDCAT CAFE !!! btw....A Mudcat is a catfish so in the river kind of theme and just generally cute/dumb thing for a name based on your real one......How about SandyBottom? Spaw |
|
18 Apr 07 - 04:49 PM (#2029271) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos YEr getting kinda deep, there, Spaw... A |
|
18 Apr 07 - 04:52 PM (#2029274) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Leadfingers And I 'Stole' the 'leadfingers' bit from the old Parody of The Boxer which I used as an opening song for gigs for YEARS before I found Mudcat ! just dropped the rest of the name ! |
|
19 Apr 07 - 02:44 PM (#2030220) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: folk1e And don't forget once you have signed in you can join "mud chat"! which is a real time discussion board (great to get to know folks with ... or through) and most of all it is FUN! One word of warning though.... you do tend to loose track of time in there! Best time is after midnight GMT! Have Fun 8oD |
|
19 Apr 07 - 03:04 PM (#2030245) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,I'd rather not say Well, FWIW, I signed in as a guest in my thread about depression because I did not want to "out" myself as someone who takes medication for depression. Such is the stigma associated with mental illness. |
|
19 Apr 07 - 03:08 PM (#2030251) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Hawker You will enjoy being a member I am sure, and they are a really useful bunch of people to know if you are seeking answers to music related topics - or even the meaning of life! everyone here has an opinion (though sometimes they are not the one you were hoping for!) And I have made some wondeful and lifelong friends here. Mudgathers at festivals are fun, too, where you can put names to faces - and learn their REAL names! Some of us here do use our real names, my pseudonym is Hawker but I always sign my postings as Lucy, WYSIWYG also signs her name usually too. There is a thread about where people got their mudcat names from, it makes interesting reading! Cheers, Lucy |
|
19 Apr 07 - 03:13 PM (#2030257) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Jean(eanjay) Guest, I'd rather not say - that's the kind of thing I would do and it's one of the reasons why guests should be allowed to start threads. I think it's the mischief making or malicious ones that are a problem. |
|
20 Apr 07 - 06:50 AM (#2030861) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: The Shambles Please restore post? |
|
20 Apr 07 - 07:56 AM (#2030909) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,The Shambles This would have been a good forum if it was not for the amount of cencorship which has reached ridiculous proportions ever since I started being nasty about people and trying to stir things up, especially on workday mornings when all good people are going about their business while I consider whom next to victimise and swallow whole dictionaries so that I can spout them out and swallow carbon paper so that I can chuck the same stuff up time and again yada yada yada yada yada yada yada Oh I forgot the full stop |
|
20 Apr 07 - 08:12 AM (#2030927) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Don(Wyziwyg)T There you are Sandra, somebody has given you a graphic illustration of the difference between member and guest posts. The first was from a member whose moniker is Shambles. Nobody else can post as a member using that moniker. The second post is more vague. It could be:- 1. Shambles posting as a guest, and using his own moniker. 2. A, probably malicious, guest posting to try to make Shambles look bad This is why most of us have joined. This post cannot originate with anyone but myself, and I'll seize the opportunity to welcome you to the madhouse. It is almost always a nice place to be, and you can always ignore the few bad bits. Welcome Don T. |
|
20 Apr 07 - 09:24 AM (#2031007) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,I'd rather not say In another thread about guns and the events at VaTech, someone mentioned a number of criminals who were on psychotropic medications. They were mentioned in a way that was a slur on those medications and anyone who takes them. That attitude only reinforces my decision not to disclose myself as being on psychiatric medication. There are many people who are more or less normal with their meds--as normal as anyone else that is--and who are no less capable of responsibly owning a gun. But perceptions persist, and the mentally ill keep getting slandered. I will not use my real name until I feel much safer about doing so. |
|
20 Apr 07 - 09:29 AM (#2031013) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: catspaw49 "2. A, probably malicious, guest posting to try to make Shambles look bad" While this is true regarding the post as undoubtedly coming from someone else, Shambles needs NO help in looking bad. He has done a spectacular job of that over the years all by himself. Spaw |
|
20 Apr 07 - 10:05 AM (#2031055) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Stilly River Sage Spaw, you're very clever. We'll see if Sandy arrives as a full-fledged 'catter soon. That was a great suggestion. Guest-I'd rather not say, you're probably wise to withhold for now your ID--we have a few oddballs who would love an opportunity to snipe, though most members here would respond favorably to your discussion. And some, like Shambles, might materially benefit from it. He needs his meds adjusted. SRS |
|
20 Apr 07 - 03:13 PM (#2031378) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Don(Wyziwyg)T I know that Spaw, but I chose to be diplomatic. I have made my feelings about Roger crystal clear in a direct message to him, and I don't feel the urge to snipe, at every possible opertunity. Don T. |
|
20 Apr 07 - 03:43 PM (#2031403) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST I have come here often , over many years as a guest, but I find that almost everything I post is deleted. I do not troll or slag others, I just add my two cents worth from time to time.But I am pretty fed up with this constant censorship. There seems to be a handful of regulars who represent the majority of the posts...and they are not to be argued with or disagreed with. A shame that narrowness is prevailing here.
-Joe Offer- |
|
21 Apr 07 - 03:26 AM (#2031742) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: George Papavgeris "We get into difficult areas when this site's moderators and their supporters confuse the right to take an action with any right to prevent discussion on the action or on the action's wisdom and effects." Some discussions are best not held in the open, for the whole readership on the web to pore over. Because they pertain to events that if stirred up again will hurt innocent third parties unnecessarily. So, when Shambles insisted on having them so discussed, he was warned, publicly and privately about the consequences of such a discussion being opened up. And that's when the fun started - because he kept insisting, and his insistent messages were wiped, and for days now he still keeps insisting, and clearly this is no longer about "democracy" (ha! have you noticed the kind of regime that calls itself "democratic" these days?) but about a perverse need on his part to "be right" at best, and malice against those likely to be hurt at worst. I may have stirred your curiosity with my obtuseness - well, tough luck. The "innocent third parties" I referred to have been on tranquallisers since this whole sorry affair began, just from the fear of past events being raked up; and I believe there has been a thankfully unsuccessful attempt at OD, too. Now, these individuals have suffered enough in the past, have never been accused of anything, they have only ever been victims. And our collective attempt "to get at the truth... for the benefit of all", more than simply smacking of sick curiosity, victimises such individuals further. I have been told the details, and will not divulge them. A few others have too. Curiously, they are among those trying to shut Shambles up. Who, if he has any shred of decency left, will let this be. |
|
21 Apr 07 - 05:11 AM (#2031794) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: sian, west wales Sandra, whether a Guest+Name or Member or Guest, you can always choose not to 'feed the trolls' - to opt out of a discussion, or not opt in at all. This thread is verging on the 'opt out' edge for me, as of the last few posts as this has been hashed and rehashed so many times it is quite boring. But let me make the comments I intended to make based on your original query and the good natured responses... I enjoy engaging in conversation with named Guests - like Guest: Sandra. Some time ago I decided that I would do my best to avoid conversing with un-named Guests. Too many are trolls, and in the absence of body language, a moniker gives me something to relate to. I relaxed on this intent just this last week. A 'Guest' asked for the lyrics of a Welsh song and a couple of us went to some lengths to get some decent references for him/her as well as the words. But the Guest has not reappeared and provided feedback. OK - it's a bit complicated in that they had actually posted to another thread and Joe Offer (I think?) had split it into a new thread BUT Joe made it quite clear where the query had gone so ... easily found. I think if you ask a question, under any persona, it is just courtesy to say thanks, at least. And yes, I've made some very good friends and connections via the Mudcat and have never regretted joining. Oh - and I started off thinking that Joe Offer might be Welsh because he was the resident Techie when I joined, and Offer means Instruments or Tools in Welsh. (pronounced OH ffair) sian, west wales |
|
21 Apr 07 - 05:39 AM (#2031807) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Dave'sWife when I joined, I thought Sinsull and Joe Offer were a married couple (they're not) Also, When I joined people assumed I was married to any number of the Daves here on Mudcat but especially DaveTNova. (I'm not. My husband posts infrequently and uses the Guest name Dave'sWife's Husband) |
|
21 Apr 07 - 05:58 AM (#2031815) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: George Papavgeris And I thought that ColK was a colonel (he's a Colin, of course, though "column" would have also been appropriate). And when I first met Big Mick I confess I was disappointed, because he was standing next to Alaska Mike who was blocking the view of a couple of mountains (mind you, I haven't seen Alaska Mike for a year or so, and the situation may have been reversed by now). |
|
21 Apr 07 - 12:48 PM (#2032024) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer Actually there have been times when I, too, thought Sinsull was my wife. Nobody but a wife would mistreat a guy that way. And for years, I've been trying to convince people that Shambles is my ex-wife - every man's worst nightmare. -Joe Offer- |
|
21 Apr 07 - 09:51 PM (#2032334) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST So tell me, are people being censored for what they say or for being guests ? People do not always have malicious intent just because they are guests....do they ? So, if ther post is a reasonable one, why censor it / Why delete it ? |
|
22 Apr 07 - 12:21 AM (#2032393) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: artbrooks GUEST 4-21@9:51 PM: one of the basic rules is that guests must have names, even if that name is one chosen for a particular thread and that guest chooses a different name for the next thread. It would seem to me that your post warrants deletion if you don't follow the rules. |
|
22 Apr 07 - 04:01 AM (#2032446) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Slag Me? I'd never slag anybody, honest! Joe. What did she say to you? "Make me an Offer."? W |
|
22 Apr 07 - 07:34 AM (#2032504) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Micca Sandra, a certain member was unhappy with their "original" member name because she felt it reflected her actual appearance, so she started a BS thread for a "new" members name, asking for suggestions that would convey the image of a tall, sexy, slinky, raven haired goddess, and thus acquired a new mudcat name, and provided a LOT of fun on the way. |
|
22 Apr 07 - 08:33 AM (#2032528) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Mr Happy Micca, you've had the op? you are now 'the image of a tall, sexy, slinky, raven haired goddess'?? |
|
22 Apr 07 - 11:44 AM (#2032633) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Jean(eanjay) Micca, I was interested in what you said because I thought you had to keep your mudcat name for life. I wouldn't mind sounding like that as well..... |
|
22 Apr 07 - 01:32 PM (#2032697) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Nigel Parsons Mr H: If Micca is now 'the image of a tall, sexy, slinky, raven haired goddess' then I would guess it's taken a lot more than just one 'op' CHEERS Nigel (Medium height, thick set, almost bald, Welsh, beer drinker!) |
|
22 Apr 07 - 01:58 PM (#2032722) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D a number of members have changed their Mudcat name...some more than once. If you do, it automatically changes all the other member posts you have made....but 'guest' posts remain....Thus, some folks who posted as guests before joining have posts under at least 2 names. (I have some from 1996-97 before there WAS membership using a different form of my name.) It make it harder to look up that way. to reply to this: "So tell me, are people being censored for what they say or for being guests ? People do not always have malicious intent just because they are guests....do they ? So, if ther post is a reasonable one, why censor it / Why delete it ?" because...'guest' posting has been abused - mostly down here in the BS section. Therefore a decision (a recent one) was reached by management that all 'guest' posts below the line should be signed in a consistent way even if you do NOT sign up! Thus, the post referred to is beyond what is acceptable. It 'may' be left alone so it can be answered....but one should NOT expect that others will be--even when forgetting to sign was accidentlal. YOU TAKE YOUR CHANCES if you don't use a consistent name! And Joe & Jeff can usually tell who is guilty. Be assured...this place has improved quite a bit since this policy was put in place. It forced a couple or three naughty posters to rethink their hobby. |
|
22 Apr 07 - 03:08 PM (#2032761) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Girl Friday I try to make sure that I log in every time I post now. otherwise I use the "without cookie" suffix. I used to post occasionally, on local threads as Geraldine the Goat but have stopped doing that now. I complained to Joe Offer about what I thought were Guest "noms des plumes" used by people who know me, being outright trolls. If you're going to say something about me, then have the guts to let me know who you are. Keep deleting GUEST posts Joe, we have the right to be able to distinguish between one guest and another's oppinions! |
|
22 Apr 07 - 06:24 PM (#2032877) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,IPdrifter There is no reliable way to determine whether each guest poster is consistently using a name, so a lot of guessing goes on. Mudcat's position is rare, if not unique. |
|
22 Apr 07 - 06:47 PM (#2032901) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer My guesses are usually reasonably well-informed, and I try to err on the side of free expression. If you feel insecure about the possibility of deletion, register. -Joe Offer- |
|
23 Apr 07 - 04:09 AM (#2033171) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Rowan Sandra, please register and join in as a member; you are most welcome. I think most of your question has been eloquently answered by now and there have been a few examples of the advantages and disadvantages of registering. And if you ever come to Oz and attend the National, we can get Bob to make you a nice Mudcat name badge. By comparison with the northern hemisphere membership there's a lot fewer of us and many of us know each other, even when separated by thousands of kilometres. Cheers, Rowan |
|
23 Apr 07 - 10:31 AM (#2033452) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Sandra Thank you very much to everyone who has offered advise etc. I have found it very helpful and I have learnt so much about Mudcat. I have decided, because of my job, not to join at the moment. One of the things that stands out as possibly the most important is that people should use the same name for each posting which I will do from now on. I have in the past used different names not realising how wrong that was - I now understand why I shouldn't! As for the 'censoring and deleting' issue - I am happy to leave that up to the powers that be - it is their web site after all. Exactly the same happens on the BBC message board only they are ten times as strict. I will use the name of Anamika as my guest name on all postings. Thanks again Sandra |
|
23 Apr 07 - 11:17 AM (#2033498) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D ok....Anamika *smile* |
|
23 Apr 07 - 11:33 AM (#2033509) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Anamika Bill D I know I still have lots to learn but I am smilling :^) |
|
23 Apr 07 - 11:56 AM (#2033540) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Scoville Not that anyone cares, but I used to be Ely until I had cookie trouble. I post as GUEST with my regular Mudcat name if I'm not on my own computer. I never post as an anonymous GUEST. So, I might say asinine things but you'll always know it's me. Neither name has anything to do with my real name, appearance, location, etc., and I think I'm registered under minimal personal information. I don't know any Mudcatters personally (I don't think) and only one, who is not a regular poster, online via an unrelated interest. I don't mind non-troll GUESTS although I don't see why one wouldn't register if s/he is going to visit and post regularly, but whatever works. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 12:17 PM (#2033557) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Anamika I would like to share what my 'name' means. It's Hindi for an anonymous person, rather like Joe Bloggs although you all know my name is Sandra. I quite like it! catspaw49 - thank you for the SandyBottom suggestion, could well have been apt but not since I last played with a sand and bucket. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 12:47 PM (#2033573) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: artbrooks And again, welcome Anamika/Sandra!!! Unless you use a work computer exclusively (and they are uptight about leaving cookies lying around), I'd really recommend "officially" joining. For one thing, that gets you access to MudChat (where some of us hang out from time to time), if that is of any interest to you. Nobody has access to your personal information except for Max and (I think) the moderator crew. You do have the option of posting a photo (of yourself, your pet cat, your son's fingerpainting, whatever) and other information if you choose. There is also an ongoing thread somewhere under "Mudcat FAQs" where you can learn to do neat things like underlining and writing in different colors. Have fun! |
|
23 Apr 07 - 02:07 PM (#2033618) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Big Mick I absolutely love that "name". Many welcomes to Mudcat, Anamika, I can see already that you are going to be a fun, and well informed member. I look forward to your posts. All the best, Mick |
|
23 Apr 07 - 04:43 PM (#2033722) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace What would you like them replaced with? |
|
23 Apr 07 - 05:55 PM (#2033786) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Mr Happy Sanity?? |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:02 PM (#2033791) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Anamika is just a name for someone with no name. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:03 PM (#2033793) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Juan Hund Red |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:15 PM (#2033803) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos Ahh, Juan!! Good to see usted! You are a relative of my fran' Juan Tou San, no? A |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:25 PM (#2033809) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Oh. You know Juan, too? It's a small world, mano. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:41 PM (#2033822) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos Yeah and his cousin, Juan Tu Mannie Cervezas. A |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:42 PM (#2033824) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: artbrooks Juan Tun a'Mary |
|
23 Apr 07 - 06:46 PM (#2033828) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace LOL both of you. HA HA. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 07:21 PM (#2033847) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: wysiwyg Anamika/Sandra, are you planning to join Mudcat then, or trying to let us know you plan on remaining an anonymous Guest? ~Susan |
|
23 Apr 07 - 08:11 PM (#2033875) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace "Anamika is popular female name in the Hindu Religion. Anamika as such means someone with no name. Vedic rishis believed that a name defined the child's character-its face, figure, temper, morals, tastes and profession. In Hindu tradition when a person is born a birthchart is created and accordingly the Alphabet for the name is chosen. Its believed that when a name is given to a child there is a predetermined qualities that develops in a person. In ancient Hindu literature Anamika means someone with no name & such a person has its individuality & destiny to be determined on her own. The name Anamika (literally 'without a name') means that the child's future is what she wants to make it, since she is not hedged in by any preordained limitations. It's a feminine name mostly popular among Bengali's. 'A' means no, 'NAM' means name. It is generally seen the many people named Anamika have Artistic Talents." From Wiki, and supported by other sites on the 'net. FYI. |
|
23 Apr 07 - 08:36 PM (#2033884) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Azizi Thanks Peace, for the info about the name Anamika. I just added it to the list of non-standard {in the USA} names that are featured on my website at http://cocojams.com/names.htm Most of the names that appear on that list were added because visitors to that site asked about their origins and meanings. Check out that page and the rest of that website if you've got a mind to. {How's that for Shameless Promotion ?} ;o) |
|
23 Apr 07 - 08:49 PM (#2033895) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Guests are rubbish, members are the best ones.john |
|
24 Apr 07 - 03:33 AM (#2034077) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST WYSIWYG - I am going to remain as a guest but I will always use the name of Anamika. Peace - I got my name from Wikipedia. I thought the explanation was excellent. I only wish I had Artistic Talent! |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:19 AM (#2034094) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Anamika Well that didn't go very well did it! I'm obviously hopeless!!! |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:59 AM (#2034109) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: sian, west wales Great name, Anamika! Hope to see you in a number of threads. Any chance of you giving us some ideas as to your main intesests? sian, west wales |
|
24 Apr 07 - 05:48 AM (#2034122) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Wordsmith I'm somewhat baffled, but that sometimes happens here...in a good way, unless, it's not. Now, that we're all in the same boat, welcome, Anamika, guest or member, whichever suits you. I have learned some new (to me) things in this thread. I never knew the origin of the name, Mudcat. Not that it mattered to me, I just thought it was cool. Now, I do. I used to bullhead...does that count? Thanks for all of the other helpful bits of information. I posted my own thread: "What's in a Name?" in order to introduce myself to my fellow/gal mudcatters and got quite a few responses. I found it broke the ice, and also explained how I "earned" the name. I always post as Wordsmith, so mudcatters can get to know me by my posts. I, too, choose to remain - sexless, for the same reasons earlier mentioned. I hear the giggles already. I didn't say celibate. Before this degenerates even further, I bid you all a fond adieu...parting is such sweet sorrow, etc., etc., etc.. Auf wiedersehen. Foreign language skills...now you know something about me. Isn't it amazing how sexy "anonymous" sounds in a different language? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 06:15 AM (#2034134) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: The Fooles Troupe We like the moo-oo-oo-oo-n... If you look up my member profile, you may just understand... Robin |
|
24 Apr 07 - 09:44 AM (#2034287) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: wysiwyg Apologies, Sandra-- I had missed your earlier post explaining that you would not be joining, til it was brought to my attention. ~Susan |
|
24 Apr 07 - 10:04 AM (#2034306) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Did anyone here ever have a bad acid trip? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 10:33 AM (#2034330) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D No, but I had a bad trip to a base once that I didn't enjoy. About a pH12 |
|
24 Apr 07 - 11:03 AM (#2034365) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Good one Bill. The reason I ask is that I am having flashbacks to a time I got stuck in a revolving door--which actually turned out to be a phone booth--and the experience lasted for about seven hours, despite friends later telling me it was really less than four seconds. I don't know what could be prompting the flashbacks. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 12:55 PM (#2034470) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,a guest's view I'm a very occasional guest here, and not much of a user of message boards etc at all, so for me not having registered is, a suppose, a virtual or e-version of a kind of in-person shyness that I've largely conquered in person. I should add that I very much appreciate the chance to use the board and to be able to post-so this guest says thanks for the e-hospitality! :) And another observation--that message boards, to newcomers, whether it's music, macintosh computer or one related to my work, can often seem to be the special territory of those who post often and know each other, know the real names behind the e-monnikers and so forth. Then the outsider or newcomer has a choice--either push a bit to join in with the conversation, or lurk in the background... As to the points about trolls and unpleasant exchanges--it seems to me that there is a very simple solution, but please pardon me if it's naive or I just don't think like most people. When someone posts something rude, aggressive or provocative, it's only an e-message, they're not shouting at you across a room. What I can't understand is why people take the bait. Silence is a reply too (and might be strong negative reinforcement for trolls |
|
24 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM (#2034496) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos Silence is a reply too Wisely put, Guest. And welcome. It has been used a great deal -- if only you could count the nummber of "read and ignore" responses the way you can "read and react" responses. It isn't easy when someone has posted in plain print something outrageous or extremely nasty. But it is a good approach from an individual perspective. A |
|
24 Apr 07 - 01:24 PM (#2034511) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: catspaw49 And sometimes it is just fun to play with the trolls whether they are serious trolls or simply idiots. Spaw |
|
24 Apr 07 - 01:42 PM (#2034528) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer Well, guestsview, you're right in thinking that things would be nicer if people wouldn't take the bait trolls set out for them - but with as many people as we have here, there's always somebody ready to take the bait and run with it. And when the trolls are anonymous, they can play things both ways - both setting the bait and taking it. But encouraging people not to respond, is not granting trolls permission to continue to stir the pot. There's something about anonymous insults - they have a leering, spooky quality to them. People can put up with an occasional insult like that, but a constant stream from an unknown source is unnerving. That's why we've taken to deleting messages from Guests who do not use a consistent name. Roger Gall, also known as Shambles, has requested that his membership be suspended because he does not wish to comply with restrictions placed upon him. Regrettably, all future messages from Mr. Gall will be deleted until such time as he agrees to accept such restrictions. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 Apr 07 - 02:20 PM (#2034573) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos I find it angering more than unnerving, because I don't like to see people shitting in a public place. Some sorts of trolling are the cyber-equivalent. The best of the 'Cat comes from folks who come here for free and open and civil and funny conversations. As far as I am concerned someone who deliberately tries to destroy that, by dragging it into his personal cloud of scum and hatred, is a destructive person. I ignore them when I can, and when I can't I try to make fun out of dealing with them. Failing that, I sometimes try to tear them a new one, verbally, but it is my least preferred option. A |
|
24 Apr 07 - 03:03 PM (#2034617) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D "... message boards, to newcomers, .... can often seem to be the special territory of those who post often and know each other, know the real names behind the e-monnikers and so forth. " yep...until you've been around awhile, it's hard to know who is likely serious, who is famous for silliness, who can be trusted to study issues instead of just repeating rumors & gossip....and it can be relevant where they are..(USA, UK, OZ..etc)...but a little lurking and cautious posting will soon bring you up to speed. Some folks 'adapt' to new places faster than others.....but here at Mudcat, there are plenty of welcomes and help unless you jump in and start arguing and accusing without saying even 'hello'... it's sorta like marrying into a family.. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:25 PM (#2034697) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Tunesmith I must admit that I am a registered member but I clear my cookies quite often, and then I can't remember my log on details and just post as a guest. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:25 PM (#2034698) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer Roger Gall, also known as Shambles, has requested that his membership be suspended because he does not wish to comply with restrictions placed upon him to control his attacks on Mudcat editors and on another Mudcatter. Regrettably, all future messages from Mr. Gall will be deleted until such time as he agrees to accept such restrictions. Any replies to Mr. Gall will also be deleted. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:27 PM (#2034701) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace So, Roger Gall has been sent to Coventry? Are we allowed to mention his name? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:29 PM (#2034704) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: John MacKenzie I think you just did ¦¬] |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:37 PM (#2034708) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: MMario tunesmith - nobody (or at least not very many) object to that; nor to non-members that use a consistant psuedonym. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:37 PM (#2034710) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Amos I think "to the Big House" might describe it better; he's doing time for stated offenses after due warning. While I would love to see a transcript of the trial, I imagine that is not going to happen. But perhaps he will return a wiser and better Catter? I guess it depends on who his cellmate is. A |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:39 PM (#2034711) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: John MacKenzie MG; CH ? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:39 PM (#2034712) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace So, Roger, WTF, huh? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:41 PM (#2034714) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: John MacKenzie XS ? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM (#2034716) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace So Roger got the axe with certain conditions. What about the member posing as Guest who's been attacking Roger? Did that asshole get the axe too? Like, WTF, ya know? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:46 PM (#2034719) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: John MacKenzie Ah but was he a member? I don't think he was, think he/she was just a stirrer from Outer Space. Just a guess, really! G |
|
24 Apr 07 - 04:50 PM (#2034721) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Either way, if that poster gets away with the shit he threw at Shambles, then Shambles was absolutely right with some of what he said. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 05:32 PM (#2034752) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: artbrooks Or, the other possibility, is that it was he who shall not be named himself..... |
|
24 Apr 07 - 05:52 PM (#2034774) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D Time will tell.... Roger has not wished to follow the management's rules for quite awhile now. It is too bad, as he has a lot to contribute when he is not in his 'righteous indignation' mode. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 06:48 PM (#2034809) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Time will tell? Bill, there was a poster who kept going at Shambles. What has been the disposition of that? Will THAT poster be named as was Shambles? If so, when? If not, why? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 06:59 PM (#2034821) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Peace Would someone in the know deal with THAT question? |
|
24 Apr 07 - 08:27 PM (#2034883) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Bill D I guess it depends on whether it was actually a member, or just a troll. Joe or Jeff can identify 'some' folks with arcane technology, but I guess there are ways to dodge that. Threads can be closed & messages deleted, but UNLESS we go to a totally closed, all member situation, complete control in not possible. |
|
24 Apr 07 - 08:49 PM (#2034905) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Joe Offer You know, Bruce, Shambles objected to ALL editorial actions. Why should I bother ot take crap from Shambles for protecting him? And for that matter, what was so wrong with the anonymous [El Greko] posts that parodied the usual posts from Shambles? The ones I saw were just funny parodies, nothing vicious. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 Apr 07 - 09:07 PM (#2034915) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Mr Happy Infamy!Infamy! -They've all got it in fer me!! |
|
24 Apr 07 - 09:15 PM (#2034919) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: Mr Happy 'Perhaps guest who are urged that 'membership has its rewards' should be made aware that on giving up this membership - whatever membership posting name they may have used in past posting will be replaced by their real name. Not that I have ever made any secret of mine but I see that every past thread and post of The Shambles - is now replaced by Roger Gall, former mudcatter. ' Suspension of membership was requested by The Shambles/Roger Gall |
|
24 Apr 07 - 09:30 PM (#2034923) Subject: RE: Members Versus Guests and Noms de Plume From: GUEST,Roger Gall former mudcatter The following was what I posted (in a thread that is now closed) Dear Max I have been a long time member of this forum and I remain a great supporter of its original aims and ethos. You have publicly made it known you no longer wish me to remain a contributor but have not blocked my contribuions or suspended my membership. And as I consider (unlike some others) I have done nothing to justify this public judgement - I have continued to try and post as I have done for many years. My concern has been that in supporting our forum, as I have always done, that I am now expected support many actions undertaken - it is claimed in the name of enabling resonable discussion. I feel that I cannot. I have recently had many of my posts 'siently deleted' and have just recieved a Personal Message warning me that - If I wish to continue using Mudcat for discussions of licensing and music and other matters, that I must refrain from certain others. I find this condition on my posting alone totally unacceptable - so can you please retract this warning and ensure that no more of my posts on any subject are deleted and restore those that have been or at least indicate to posters where such action has been imposed? As I have every intention of coninuing to try posting all of my views - if you are not prepared to do as I request - can you please suspend my membership? NOTE At no point have I requested that contributions posted under the name The Shambles should be replaced with Roger Gall former mudcatter. If this is normal under these circumstances then any guest thinking of becoming a member should be made aware of it. If it is not normal, then perhaps the reasons behind why it has happened in this case need to be explained? OK. That's it. There will be no discussions of Mudcat editing policy or Mudcat policy in general until after after the first of May. None whatsoever. This a music forum. Go talk about music. |