|
04 Aug 10 - 12:07 PM (#2958024) Subject: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Sean Mc Threads about songs with offensive language need to have the title 'bleeped'. Besides, these songs have nothing to do with the folk tradition and have no place here. This is the second time I have been affronted whilst browsing Mudcat. I have not responded to the thread in question because it simply perpetuates it. I am not a prude - far from it, but, as it seems to be acceptable here and likely to happen again, I guess I will just have to exercise my option by not coming back. Anyone know of a folk website where decency is observed? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:14 PM (#2958029) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Bobert Music websites tend to be somewhat confrontational 'cause folks have so mnay different opinions what is good and what ain't... Goes with the territory... I mean, I have been in bands where bandmates weren't exactly on the same page... B~ |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:16 PM (#2958032) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: The Sandman in my opinion, the majority of problems on this site are caused by guests. I was recently slandered by a guest, an accusation was made which was a complete pack of lies,the person got away with it because they were anonymous, this could not have happened if the site was members only. no,I am sorry I dont know of a website where decency is observed, but I think this site is no worse than any others when it comes to four letter words.
-Joe Offer- |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:16 PM (#2958033) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: DonMeixner Hi Sean, I am not offended by bad language and wouldn't make an issue of it's use. I don't use it my self most of the time because I know people who are offended by it. You are not likely to see it from me more than once or twice a year in the text of a post. I doubt you'll ever see it in a thread title from me. But if you are so offened by the occasional F bomb that you will have to depart from these threads I'll say "So long" now. I think it will be too bad for me because you will not be here to offer an opinion or share some music. And it will be too bad for you because of all the great opinions, ideas, references, and art you will miss. All because of one little word on a page of what must be thousands of other innocuous words. Don |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:17 PM (#2958034) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: radriano Maintaining such a large website and database is not easy. How about a bit more understanding and less demanding. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:19 PM (#2958035) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Manitas_at_home If you 'bleep' the words how will we know what they should be? I don't like gratuitous swearing myself but nor do I like Bowdlerisation. If that word is in the song then that's what should be shown. You could always look at another song. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:20 PM (#2958038) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: greg stephens Well, it's all depends on what you mean by folk. Personally, I would have thought any workable definition of folk would have to include the vernacular, unpublished, word-of-mouth disseminated type of thing. And "unpublished", naturally, will always include "unpublishable". Having said that, there is an argument for not using the more common playground insult words in the titles of threads, if they cause offense.But that argument is only on grounds of limiting potential readership. There can be no argument for completely excluding songs because they contain swear words: unless you want to designate Mudcat as an International Forum for the Discussion of Polite Folk Songs? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:32 PM (#2958045) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: greg stephens Some people are just naturally bolshie, unfortunately. The original poster of this thread is notorious for swear-word personal attacks on other people, so it seems odd to come over all suddenly prudish. Perhaps this is just the usual trolling sort of thing? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:33 PM (#2958047) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: maeve Sean Mc said, "Threads about songs with offensive language need to have the title 'bleeped'." He is saying that he is offended by the language in some song titles, as posted in threads here. He has not asked that songs be changed. Rather, he suggests that unnecessary offense might be avoided by using *** or some such device, allowing those who choose to avoid offensive language may do so. Perhaps we can offer a useful discussion of this concern that honors his right to express his view. Sean- Although I don't personally care for some language here, I find that the wealth of beauty of tune and lyric and the delights of intelligent discussion usually outweigh the dregs. I seek the first and avoid the latter. I trust you will pilot your course as is best for you. Regards, maeve |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:35 PM (#2958049) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Q (Frank Staplin) Randolph-Legman's Roll Me in Your Arms", Cray's The Erotic Muse, and some Mudcat offerings bleeped? One hell of a lot of folk offerings might fit your request. Who decides what is "offensive language ?." May the heavens forbid! |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:38 PM (#2958051) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Manitas_at_home Who's going to volunteer for all that editing? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:42 PM (#2958055) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Amos And why should your particular sensitivities, exagerrated and possibly hypocritical as they are, have precedence over the simpler principle of reflecting the actual language as used by those who wrote the titles? OR over the right of people to decide for themselves whether they want the ground truth or a prudified, gussied-up and sanitized version of it? We are talking about folk-music, after all, not some adulterated white-washed extract. A |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:43 PM (#2958056) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Amos Furthermore, I am offended by the contentious, over-generalized, unappreciative tone you take concerning the free services of the site, of which you seem more than willing to take advantage. A |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:44 PM (#2958057) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: GUEST,Shimrod I was delighted by a recent quote from the author Philip Pullman (the 'Golden Compass' man). Someone claimed to be offended by his latest book, and he said to them: "You have no right to go through your life not being offended." Quite right too! |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:45 PM (#2958058) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Bill D I have said many times...and I KEEP saying, as I did in *that* thread... that having unexpurgated lyrics available does not bother me. All I wish is that we could avoid having casual browsers who are just glancing at a list of threads being surprised by the language...and this means kids.... *IF* someone wants to find the unexpurgated parts, it is perfectly easy, both in Mudcat search or Google search..(if one sets their preferences to 'no filtering') I think that words widely considered objectionable should be 'edited' IN THREAD TITLES. Then, the full text is easily found by looking. (Heck-- we have the full text of "Eskimo Nell" in the database! I heard it sung in its entirety once, and was not 'offended') |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:46 PM (#2958059) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray The old Harvest Home forum had an automatic expletive generator which would turn Scunthorpe into S****horpe even as you typed it! All a bit high-tech for mudcat methinks... |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:46 PM (#2958060) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: greg stephens Maeve: read the original post. He is not just just asking for the titles to be cleaned up, he is asking for the songs that he disapproves of to be totally excluded. They "have no place here" is what he says. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:47 PM (#2958062) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Bill D "Mary had a little plane, And in it she did frisk. But when she flew it upside down, Her little *..." |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:49 PM (#2958063) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Bill D ".. he is asking for the songs that he disapproves of to be totally excluded. " Right...and THAT is the extreme view, and we mostly agree that 'most' of those ARE folk songs. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:51 PM (#2958064) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: greg stephens Actually, I disapprove of this whole thread. The title contains inaccurate punctuation. I cannot believe the clones have permitted this. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:53 PM (#2958069) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Manitas_at_home Besides, Mudcat isn't capable of doing any cleaning - *someone* has to clean up Mudcat. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:55 PM (#2958070) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: maeve Hello, Greg. I did read the OP. I see this line expressing an opinion, "Besides, these songs have nothing to do with the folk tradition and have no place here." but nothing stating a demand for removal. I love this site with its riches and its warts and its fascinating people of all descriptions. I would not support deletion of lyrics or songs based on such opinions, but I do think we are capable of talking about the subject (again) without feeling we or the mighty Mudcat are threatened. In short: What Bill D. said Date: 04 Aug 10 - 12:45 PM . Respectfully, maeve who fears no word yet prefers to use them, as any tool, in the right place for the right job. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 12:56 PM (#2958074) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Paul Burke Besides, these songs have nothing to do with the folk tradition and have no place here. It would help if he could give an example of a song which has NOTHING to do with the folk tradition, and explain which folk tradition he means. Singing, singing, buttercups and bloody daisies? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 01:01 PM (#2958079) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie I notice one solution tendered is to not have "guest" contributors. I prefer doing the guest thing. When I joined, some people kept rattling on pushing their views through private posts. At least as a guest I don't have that to contend with. I also resent the inference that guests don't watch their language. I reckon it is 50/50. or in other words, nothing to do with having guest status, (or lack of if you prefer....) If you feel offended then please find a sanitised forum, I am sure they exist. But traditional songs such as Bonny Black Hare may not be on the lyric archives, so not much use as a folk forum then. Also, on the BS section, you can find words such as Th*tcher. Now that spills my coffee too..... |
|
04 Aug 10 - 01:14 PM (#2958091) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: Ebbie "prudified," Amos Would you like to refudiate that? |
|
04 Aug 10 - 01:20 PM (#2958097) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up it's act? From: DonMeixner So, where is Sean Mc in reply? D |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:03 PM (#2958138) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Well, I'm going to remove the offending apostrophe from my post here; because if I don't want it in my post, I don't have to have it. For that matter, I'm going to remove the apostrophe from the thread title - Mudcatters have control of their own posts, but Mudcat retains rights over thread titles. I suppose I cringe a bit when I see the word "Fuck" on the Forum Menu - but I think it ought to be there if we are talking about a song with "fuck" in the song title. Similarly, I was offended by those who insisted on removing the word "Nigger" from threads discussing the well-known song, "Run Nigger Run." Still, I breathe a sigh of relief when nobody has posted to the thread for 24 hours and it drops off the Forum Menu. I am far more offended myself when I see prudish euphemisms like F*** and N**** I also have to say that I really hate the "PG13" tag that has been added to some thread titles, even though I'm the one who suggested adding the PG13 to appease complaints. I also don't like abbreviations that are not immediately understandable, like "OP." The Original Poster says that "these songs have nothing to do with the folk tradition." By that, I think he means that the songs are not very old. But age is not the only thing that determines whether a song is a folk song; and sometimes songs enter the folk process at a very early age. I contend that bawdy songs are almost the only true, living folk songs that are alive and healthy today - they come from the people, and are changed by the people as time and conditions move along. In addition, such songs are able to escape the process of commercialization that has almost completely destroyed the folk process. I think it's highly unlikely that anyone is going to try to slap a copyright on "Fuck You Jane Fonda" or "Eat, Bite, Fuck, Suck." Oh, I suppose people could also complain about our allowing threads like Barney and the many Chinaman song threads to continue - but these threads have gone on for years and have dozens of song variations posted to them. Distasteful or not, these songs are excellent examples of the folk process. Most people who know me are aware that I go to church three to five times a week and that "fuck" is not an ordinary part of my vocabulary - but I refuse to replace the word with euphemisms when I need to use it. "Naughty words" do make me cringe a bit, but I am far more offended by euphemisms. So, when you complain about the offensiveness of this or that, remember that other people are just as vehemently opposed to euphemisms. The solution? Feel free to control your own use of language, and give other people the freedom to control theirs. Somebody above made a good point: if you euphemize the titles of songs, how are people going to be able to search for them? Do we need to have some sort of standardization of euphemisms, and then a key to understanding the Official Mudcat Euphemization Code? If you don't like bawdy lyrics, I think you'll find that most of the lyrics are clean at: If you really think that Mudcat needs to censor out bad language, I suggest you discuss the matter with Mudcat's owner, Max Spiegel, max@mudcat.org Free, unrestricted, uncensored posting of lyrics has been our policy since Mudcat began on October 1, 1996, and it is one of our basic operating principles. It has also been the policy of the Digital Tradition Folk Song Database since it was established in 1988. Only Max Spiegel can change this policy for Mudcat, and only Dick Greenhaus can change the Digital Tradition policy. -Joe Offer, Forum Moderator- joe@mudcat.org |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:11 PM (#2958142) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: DonMeixner Hear Hear Don |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:11 PM (#2958144) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos Certainly, Ebbie. I submit "Grundied and Comstocked" in its place. I see no reason to use crude abusive language when a more ornate form will serve. A |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:28 PM (#2958167) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: MGM·Lion Joe ~ Could you please explain PG13, which I have not come across before in a year on the site. ~Michael~ |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:28 PM (#2958168) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Mavis Enderby The old Harvest Home forum had an automatic expletive generator which would turn Scunthorpe into S****horpe even as you typed it! All a bit high-tech for mudcat methinks... Chortle! Reminds me of a photo I once saw of an event held at Scunthorpe which had "Scunthorpe" in large letters at the back of the stage. Unfortunately, only part of the word was visible above the performer in the photo... |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:35 PM (#2958175) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,999 PG 13 is a movie classification in North America. It means Parental Guidance required (or suggested) for children 13 or under. Today that means you can kill fifty people in the first ten minutes, yell lots and say stuff like shit, etc. The censors worry mostly about nudity--or so it seems to me. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:40 PM (#2958181) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Arthur_itus Well fucking hell Joe, I hope when you go to church, they wash your mouth out. You have said more offensive swear words in your last post than I dare say in my family, and I don't go to church. I fucking agree with Sean MC. You shouldn't allow fucking titles to have such offensive words in. There are children who come on this site. Have you no f****** concern for them. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:41 PM (#2958182) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Cool Beans at a foreign computer Well put, Joe Offer! |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:51 PM (#2958190) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Sorcha LOLOLOL! I wanna be offended about something too! Whatever shall I choose? Such a lot of choices.....Burkas, Jews, Hamas, sexuality, politics... Oh hell, I can't be bothered. Being offended takes energy. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:52 PM (#2958194) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: topical tom Discourage the use of euphemisms and encourage the use of the true words, be they offensive to some or not. You made a very good argument, Joe. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:53 PM (#2958195) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Q (Frank Staplin) OED allows refutal. What's wrong with refudiate? The language is reft if word coinage is subject to stintage. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 02:54 PM (#2958196) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Hmmmm. Michael, you present a challenge. You can put PG13 in the Filter and set the age back to get our "PG13" threads, but I'm not sure I can make a link for you. Try this:Like I say, the PG13 tag makes me cringe, but it does serve a purpose. If you are viewing Mudcat from your employer's computer, and your employer's computer won't let you go to sites with naughty words, and it's a day when a naughty word is active on the Forum Menu, there IS a way to set the Mudcat Forum Menu to filter out all threads with the "PG13" tag. But I forget how to do it. You can filter out anything once you get to the Forum Menu, but how you get to the Forum Menu to filter out naughty words in the first place if there's a naughty word showing and the boss's computer won't let you at it? Not much help, am I? Oh...."PG13" is the U.S. designator for movies that are not suitable for children under the age of 13, so those films require Parental Guidance. It was the best tag we could come up with at the time, although I know it isn't readily understood outside the US. -Joe- |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:06 PM (#2958209) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May Bye then Sean. Exercise your democratic right to leave. I find it quite refreshing that people can actually speak their mind without the PC thought police interfering. There are limits, but there are far worse things in this life than a few swearwords. Then we get the sanctimonious 'What about kids visiting the site'? What about them? They say and hear far worse at school . . . So bye bye Sean, have fun - and when you find this Shangri La, just pop back and leave us the URL. xxx (they're kisses, not swearwords :o) |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:12 PM (#2958211) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: theleveller What a totally fucking stupid thread. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:12 PM (#2958212) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rafflesbear I wonder if there is an Atlantic divide on this. I write from east of the pond and PERSONALLY would prefer that all subject titles were 'clean' for some reason I find it more distracting in the context of Mudcat than I do when watching a film such as Die Hard which I enjoy |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:13 PM (#2958213) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Sean Mc What a bunch of morons |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:16 PM (#2958214) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May Just another quick thought . . . Is it the WORDS we don't like, or the meaning?? I suggest you get a good dictionary and look up what 'NICE' actually means (original meaning), then look up 'SOPHISTICATED'. Still want to complain? At least these 'bad' words are honest and up-front. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:20 PM (#2958218) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,999 BS: 'I'm forever blowing bubbles...' I was SHOCKED to see the above as a thread title. ABsoLUTELY SHOCKED! |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:22 PM (#2958219) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer So, Sean, is "What a bunch of morons" all you have to say in response? How do you respond to my contention that bawdy songs are some of the few surviving pure examples of the folk process? I realize that most of the early collectors censored out the bawdiness in songs they collected (most notably in sea songs), but do you truly think that was a good thing? -Joe- |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:24 PM (#2958221) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,999 ``Anyone know of a folk website where decency is observed?`` Yeah, but you`ve been so fuckin` rude I ain`t gonna tell ya. Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:37 PM (#2958238) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief "OP" is bog standard internetwebspeak. If people can't speak web, they should log out and watch TV. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 03:40 PM (#2958241) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,999 Wot`s a TV. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:25 PM (#2958286) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D A TV is a guy who wears dresses and.....never mind |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:29 PM (#2958291) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Steve Gardham Come on! This has got to be a send up! I love you people! OP, fuck off! And that's from a saintly English teacher. (Retired I should add). Some of my ex-pupils are on here. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:34 PM (#2958296) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Georgiansilver Many people know that I am a Christian... and as such I do not like to hear or see expletives in use... however.... if I open a thread, I can always close it again if I don't like the content the same as I can ignore things on the street. We all have choices.. If you choose to be here then you may encounter 'all manner of things' which you don't like.. TOUGH... the site wasn't designed with anyone in particular in mind other than perhaps people who appreciate/write/perform..... Folk music........ If you can't stand the heat. get out of the kitchen I say! |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:45 PM (#2958306) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Uncle_DaveO Sean Mc (lower case c) brilliantly riposted with this intellectual gem: What a bunch of morons Sean, thank you for raising the tone of MC (capital C)! Dave Oesterreich |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:48 PM (#2958309) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Mooh WTF? I liked George Carlin's view that fuck is the beginning of life (though I'm not RC or PC). Seems that we all started that way anyway. "I guess I will just have to exercise my option by not coming back." OP said. That's like leaving town because one person or group swears. This is a community, and though there are general values (for lack of a better term or more imagination on my part), that's not what binds us together. Peace, Mooh. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 04:54 PM (#2958313) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos Hey, Mooh!! Long time no hear!! Welcome back. Methinks the moronism doth show loud in accusation... |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:01 PM (#2958319) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish 1 "What a bunch of morons" Well! How Pisspot Rude is that??????? Nope, got it wrong Sean.. We're a bunch of fucking morons on Mudcat...and proud to be so, because it's one of the last places where free thought rules and grown ups are allowed to be exactly that...Those that moan about swearing usually end up in turnip fields, arse end downwards, on here, so be careful! ;0) I noticed you sign in as 'Sean Mc', so I guess you're a little embarrassed by the remainder of your name..so..er...would you be one of the McFucks, at all? It's just that I've heard they're bloody brilliant at expl*t**g all over the place...so I got to thinking that maybe you're just fuck*** wind*** everyone up a little.... ;0) The BBC Radio 2 F&A site is an excellent site for no swear words..Hell, you can't even write about c*c*erels on there! Nor go c*c*adoodledooooooo! I'd suggest you try it..and it's filled with Moaning Minnies! Trust me, you'll fuckin' LOVE it! :0) |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:04 PM (#2958321) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Mooh Amos, thanks. Been east (mostly NS) for a couple of weeks after being busier than I want to be for months. Maybe all roads lead to Mudcat, regardless of cuss words. Peace, Mooh. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:10 PM (#2958326) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Llizzie Cornish 1 Bruce, you're gonna love this! ;0) Here you go, Sean..the new way to destress: The Way of 'Fuck It' - Honest, it's a real site..and..I have the BOOK! :0) And here's the Youtube version...Sean, you so need to sign up for this.. ;0) You see, Sean...ALL you need to do is say "Fuck it!" every time you see the 'F' word and all the stress drains out of you. Over here in Torquay the air is filled with Fucks for all sorts of different reasons! It's used as a greeting, as a warning, as an OUCH!, as an OOH!, as a MY word but she's a stunner!, as Goodbye, as calling to a friend... Yes, Torquay is the ultimate fucking town...and at night they even put the word to the actual Oxford English Dictionary descriptional usage, down on the harbour side... Ah yes, The fucking English Riviera ain't wot it used 2 B LOL |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:14 PM (#2958331) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge We rightly now stigmatise the antics of the Rev Dr Bowdler. The OP is the same. You cannot discuss "folk" if you are to be limited in the words that may be discussed. It follows from the 1954 definition. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:15 PM (#2958334) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Well I might as well weigh in too...being an outspoken sort..sometimes. I find it rather umm, GREAT that there is a website, in which one can express their angst virtually any way they want..within reason!(God only knows, I've pushed the envelope a few times). As a person who composes(me), the dynamics of emotions, I find rather useful, and stimulating...even with the posters I have had 'tiffs' with. Frankly, if 'The Mudcat Forum' was to 'clean up its act', perhaps, instead of posters posting, we would just have impostors posing and posturing !!!! I surely hope, as a musician, you aren't as squeamish about the places you MIGHT play, or the audiences that MIGHT listen. Perhaps they should go through a 'mind cleansing' before you'd let them into the room! Get real, and get over it! .......oh, and quit being a phony!! I best conclude this, before I get started, and unleash on ya'..(though it may well be entertaining) Most Sincerely, GfS |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:19 PM (#2958339) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri This is one thing that really bugs me: how some people can get so offended at just reading the word "fuck", but can easily call other human beings "morons". I think the latter is far more evil than the former. I think name calling and ridicule ere usually a bottom-of-the-barrel, desperate tactics, no matter who they're aimed at. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:30 PM (#2958345) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Barrt Get real, man... |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:31 PM (#2958347) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST well fuck me sideways! i have read some weird threads on here, but this is daft, and you lot are daft for reading and posting to it! me? i am above such fucking stupidity. hope all is well with everyone? take care jade x x x x |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:37 PM (#2958355) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Jeri: "This is one thing that really bugs me: how some people can get so offended at just reading the word "fuck", but can easily call other human beings "morons". Jeri, Perhaps it comes easy for someone, who is not offended about thinking about fucking morons!... not knowing, what either is! GfS: "Ok..Down GfS... Get back in your cage!"....GfS: "OK" (Roses are red, Violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic, And so am I!) Wink, GfS |
|
04 Aug 10 - 05:57 PM (#2958367) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Q (Frank Staplin) Dunbar, 1505- Poems, lxxv, Be his feiris he wald haue fukkit. Rochester, 1680- Poems on Several Occasions, Much wine had passed with grave discourse, Of who Fucks who, and who does worse. A. Robertson, 1750- Poems, But she gave proof that she could fuck. Joyce, 1922- Ulysses, His wife is fucked yes and damn well fucked too. OED. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 06:05 PM (#2958374) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Tootler ...fuck me sideways! Interesting........hmmm The mind boggles |
|
04 Aug 10 - 06:13 PM (#2958381) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Steve Shaw My post got scissored. It should have read "I was recently slandered by a guest, an accusation was made which was a complete pack of lies,the person got away with it because they were anonymous, this could not have happened if the site was members only." Bit rich, actually, Dick, considering that you are prone, at least on one site we both know well, to changing your user name extremely frequently and even resorting to the name "anon" at one time. Either use your real name (like me) or stop complaining. One or the other. |
|
04 Aug 10 - 06:14 PM (#2958383) Subject: Lyr Add: Sideways, the Kipper Family From: Jeri The Kippers, from In the Family Way We Did It Sideways And now - the end is nigh, Our business soon - will be completed, But e'er - we say good-bye, We've this to add - so please stay seated. Now we - have hunted crabs, Both from the shore - and in the tide ways, But more, much more than that, We did it side-ways. What is a crab - what have it got, If not eight legs - then it is not. What e'er its part - in the creation, Still that is not - a true crustation. The way to tell - is like ourselves, They do it side-ways. Cuz yes - I've had a few, But then again - too few to mention, They taste - of nought at all, And always give - us indigestion. So when - we near King's Lynn, Where they are served - in funny fried ways, We snort - please pass the port, And do it side-ways. Once et a meal - they give us trout, We ate it up - and spat it out, And though they stayed - and called us selfish, We would not eat - what is not shellfish, We couldn't stop - we had to hop, But did it side-ways. They say - a man must do, What he must do - that's why we did it. We always - caught the crabs, We're proud to say - we never hid it. We meet - young ladies sweet, Who try to tempt - us in untried ways, But always - love our wives, And do it side-ways. And now - the end have come. spoken: And none too soon in my humble opinion |
|
04 Aug 10 - 07:15 PM (#2958416) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Sheila Joe, thanks for mentioning the "clean" sites at 2:03 PM. One was new to me, and exploring around, I found folk songs such as "William Grismond" and "Sweet Joan" which have lyrics as insinuating and potentially bawdy as any one may find. You're always on top, in my book. Sheila |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:11 AM (#2958558) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May What a refreshing thread. Now I KNOW why I visit one of the last bastions of free thought and expression, even if it DOES contain the 'f' word now and again. Err . . . that's life . . . isn't it? Have fun, Brian |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:27 AM (#2958561) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: LadyJean My mother hid her John Jacob Niles records, when we were younger. She didn't think her growing daughters should listen to the likes of "Little Mattie Groves". Then, one day, on the Smothers Brothers" show, Donovan sang, "We were only having a laugh, and a giggle in a bubbly bath, when in walked her mother and her big brother." Mom's John Jacob Niles records came out of hiding, as did her volume of Restoration Comedies, knowing that we would see worse on television. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 05:25 AM (#2958632) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rob Naylor Rafflesbear: I wonder if there is an Atlantic divide on this. I write from east of the pond and PERSONALLY would prefer that all subject titles were 'clean' for some reason I find it more distracting in the context of Mudcat than I do when watching a film such as Die Hard which I enjoy _____________ No Atlantic divide here...I thought Joe O's long post above summed it up perfectly, and I'm east of the pond too. I use a climbing site where *almost* anything goes, except that it auto-edits words from a "no-no" list, leading to "c**kerell", "Sc**thorpe, "Wast**ter" etc. People just get around it by typing "tw@" or "fcuk" or eliding words to come up with something like "twunt" which now seems to be the insult of choice on that site. Debate there is very robust, and I've never understood why they get so prissy about "swear" words. Another site I use is so "fluffy" that the minute anyone disagrees with someone else on a thread, the affected person is likely to flounce off or break down into "virtual tears". That one has the most rigorous word-censorship I've ever seen anywhere. Debate there is boring and sterile and everyone tiptoes around issues for fear of giving offence. I like this site...the balance is just right, AFAIC. I find the mechanics of using it a bit frustrating at times, but understand now why it is as it is, and have adapted accordingly. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 06:00 AM (#2958644) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rafflesbear A bit like going to a folk club and someone starts singing D-I-V-O-R-C-E :-) |
|
05 Aug 10 - 06:03 AM (#2958645) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: TheSnail "We were only having a laugh, and a giggle in a bubbly bath, when in walked her mother and her big brother." Of course in a traditional song, it would have been her seven brothers who walked in and argued amongst themselves for a bit until one of them ran him through. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 06:15 AM (#2958650) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu I always thought PG was Pretty Good. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 08:23 AM (#2958713) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Manitas_at_home Perhaps I didn't hit submit so I'll say again to Sean Mc, if you don't like it here don't let the door hit your arse on the way out. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 09:47 AM (#2958749) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: artbrooks Shouldn't that be *rs*? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:25 AM (#2958766) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: open mike I can see how having "certain" words spelled out in thread titles might offend someone, and turn off newcomers to the site. Perhaps titles could have A*teri*ks , but the messages could contain the full words. there is a certain thread which mentions a song called F**k Jane Fonda, which expresses a certain personal slanderous comment. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:33 AM (#2958775) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban Does anyone really believe asterisks soften the blow? I mean, Is F**K you more acceptable than Fuck you ? What's more, the confusion it created, I know people who write F**k when they mean Folk. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:46 AM (#2958781) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing I think that words widely considered objectionable should be 'edited' IN THREAD TITLES. Then, the full text is easily found by looking. - BillD - That's exactly the point we tried to make years ago in "that" thread, at least I *think* we're talking about the same one. I don't give a damn about fuck being in any titles, but I do not like to see racist labels in the thread titles. In the songs, for authenticity, okay, but as Bill said, it'd be better, imo, if they were not in the thread titles. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:00 AM (#2958795) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray but I do not like to see racist labels in the thread titles. In the songs, for authenticity, okay, So - good old authentic traditional racism is okay? Which differs from any other brand of racism how exactly? Please explain. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:01 AM (#2958796) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D "Is F**K you more acceptable than Fuck you ?" Yes...IN THE TITLE... to repeat my opinion: When casual browsers, especially kids, scan a list of threads it avoids shock, and it helps avoid having filter programs refuse access to the entire Mudcat page! The filter programs do not open the threads to see what is in them....they only 'see' what is on open display. Thus, those who WISH to read about explicit songs may do so, and those who come here NOT wanting such songs have fair warning. It's about the closest we can come to a fair compromise. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:06 AM (#2958799) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban [i]Yes...IN THE TITLE... to repeat my opinion[/i] I find that strange and I don't understand it. Is it a sort of make believe the word isn't actually there? My point of view ofcourse. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:13 AM (#2958802) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: BobKnight The world is full of people trying to impose their ideas of what's right on others - mostly religious extremists who seem to be outraged at just about everything. They piss me off - big time. Where my soap-box - I feel a rant coming on. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:13 AM (#2958804) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri The anti-profanity PROGRAMS don't care if you can figure out what the asterisks represent. So yes, for all practical purposes, you are fooling the programs into thinking the word isn't actually there. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:17 AM (#2958806) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D I find it strange that you do not understand it. Of course most humans looking at the title will know exactly what the asterisks stand for....I said clearly that the 'main' use is to not trip filtering programs, so that someone looking for love songs will not be blocked IF that thread is currently visible. It will also be a slight relief to those who 'tend' to be offended by list of 'naughty words, but if that was all **s did, I would not bother. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:19 AM (#2958807) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D There ..cross-posted explanations.... better? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:29 AM (#2958816) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: dick greenhaus Where is Thomas Bowdler when we need him? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:32 AM (#2958820) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D He's in He** with Anthony Comstock. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:32 AM (#2958821) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban Fair enough I missed that bit: and it helps avoid having filter programs refuse access to the entire Mudcat page! The filter programs do not open the threads to see what is in them....they only 'see' what is on open display. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:34 AM (#2958822) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: maeve He's been Bowdlerised, Dick. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:36 AM (#2958824) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban That would be D**k then wouldn't it? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:54 AM (#2958842) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D LOLOL... |
|
05 Aug 10 - 12:30 PM (#2958859) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Haruo The Mudcat is an ideal place to display and discuss fuck music, I think. I presume in this thread Sean Mc got what he wanted. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:16 PM (#2958894) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,me When will water stop flowing downhill? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:35 PM (#2958902) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: open mike I always thought PG was "Pregnant" |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:39 PM (#2958903) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: sciencegeek I have to admit being a bit perplexed when I saw the thread title... and then a tad annoyed at the presumption that some songs had no business being discussed at all. Has the ghost of Francis Childs returned and is attempting to asert puritanical control over traditional & folk music? The use of "whilst" leads me to assume that the poster lives across the pond and makes me once again glad that (in spite of the best attempts by the puritanical right wingers)that I and the folks who run Mudcat live in the "US of A" and have a constitutional right to freedom of speech. And one consequence of that right is that it applies across the board - any and every viewpoint has the same right of expression. A hell of a lot of blood has been shed over the years to ensure that some very basic freedoms have been preserved for us and our decendents. Thankfully, this small scirmish is being conducted using keyboards and not guns or other lethal devices. But I can't help but think of all the places on this planet where the right to think for myself or express my own opinions is but a forlorn hope. Makes me wonder what Woody Guthrie would have had to say about it. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:45 PM (#2958905) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: catspaw49 I would also propose that besides Dick, we remove Peter and John as well. Then of course there is pussy, cock, gay, jig, pork, screw, hump, suck, ball, bone, tits, booby, trim......................... Can we all just move on now from the moronic, broke-dick, jadrool, that started this thread and allow him the privacy to go fuck himself? Spaw |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:49 PM (#2958906) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer ....and just so nobody is taken aback, let me assure you that Spaw is simply being affectionate, in his own f***ing way... |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:50 PM (#2958908) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban I would also propose that besides Dick, we remove Peter and John as well. Then of course there is pussy, cock, gay, jig, pork, screw, hump, suck, ball, bone, tits, booby, trim.............. And Ireland's favourites, Mickey and Fanny? Once you start there's no end to it. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 01:52 PM (#2958910) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri Spawpologist! |
|
05 Aug 10 - 02:00 PM (#2958917) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: maeve "A Clean Song" Oscar Brand |
|
05 Aug 10 - 02:10 PM (#2958921) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: sciencegeek thank you, maeve! I have that old album, but haven't listened to it for years.... but I can "hear" it even as I type this... :D lately I've been bemoaning the current tide of pandering to the least tolerant instead of standing up for tolerance, understanding and acceptance. what ever happened to agreeing to disagree? there are times when it feels like we're living in a particularly unpleasant episode of the Twilight Zone. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 02:55 PM (#2958939) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban I had to look up that one. Hehe. It's here on Youtube |
|
05 Aug 10 - 02:59 PM (#2958942) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Peter Laban This one, on the other hand... |
|
05 Aug 10 - 03:35 PM (#2958956) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Don Firth Comedian Penn Gillette once remarked that there are people who could walk through the debris after an explosion in a Scrabble tile factory and find something to be offended at. Sean Mc, you'd better fasten your seat belt, because I'm afraid the ride is going to get a bit bumpy for you. The Federal Communications Commission is in the process of rescinding the ban on the "seven forbidden words," the ones that cannot be said on radio or television (shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits). Bon appetite. Don Firth |
|
05 Aug 10 - 03:40 PM (#2958958) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: skarpi Bleep!! where can you find a website that dosen´t have a word that needs a Bleep !!!! |
|
05 Aug 10 - 03:46 PM (#2958961) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu Spaw... "Can we all just move on now from the moronic, broke-dick, jadrool, that started this thread and allow him the privacy to go fuck himself?" I thought that was already established, no? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 03:53 PM (#2958967) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief Makes me wonder what Woody Guthrie would have had to say about it. "Fuck it." |
|
05 Aug 10 - 04:21 PM (#2958979) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D even Oscar Brand's "Good Ship Venus" Peter Laban linked to is partially self-censored |
|
05 Aug 10 - 04:36 PM (#2958987) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May It's funny isn't it? People here getting their knickers in a twist over a couple of words they don't like, whilst 'respectable' governments, ministers, industrialists, celebrities and so on are cheerfully ramming the bat up our collective arse - but they're polite about it? Err, I wonder which one I prefer . . . Try going to the Acoustic Guitar Forum where you can't even write 'damn' without censorship. I described a bastard file and had it censored, I then attached a dictionary definition, I nearly then got banned for questioning the the moderator - he was actually quite rude BUT he didn't use any rude words. So those of you who are complaining about the odd swear word, think on, that sometimes the alternative is equally as bad, it's all in the name of decency - yeah right. Yank government bitching about BP not paying out enough money, when not a penny has been paid to Union Carbide's victims in India. That's perhaps another dose of Midwest Bible belt decency, they won't SAY it, but they certainly DO it. Now how do you view a couple of swear words? Is it of cosmic importance? Don't like it? Then fuck off and don't come back - you can have my place at AGF. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 04:58 PM (#2958999) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Duran Hey, what's this song about Jane Fonda ? One of the more interesting nuggets in this slag heap. Do tell, open mike. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 05:03 PM (#2959002) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: skarpi Brian May , why tell people to F"""""""""""""" and don´t come back ?? its not your call is it ??? , its their own call to do so . |
|
05 Aug 10 - 06:36 PM (#2959053) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: The Fooles Troupe "I always thought PG was "Pregnant" " I've always what what Page 13 had to do with anything - and in which book? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 07:23 PM (#2959077) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer OK, so the Jane Fonda song is Fuck You Jane Fonda. But now I'm wondering about this PG13 stuff. We started the tag so people could filter out the bawdy stuff so they could view Mudcat stuff on their bosses' computers.....but now I can't remember how to make a "filter out" link. Can anybody help? -Joe- You CAN use this link to "happy" threads (which don't have bad stuff), and then filter out PG13, and that will work. Search for "happy!" threadsIf you have a computer that blocks you from Mudcat when thread titles have "naughty" words, copy this link. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 07:36 PM (#2959083) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Paul Burke Well trolled, Sean Mc. Classic ploy, a fatuous but inflammatory comment, and no visits back but to stir it a bit ('morons') when it seems to be getting a bit quiet. Have you considered the possibility that 'moron' might be as offensive as 'cunt'? By the way, which one are you? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 07:40 PM (#2959090) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: kendall "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." (Former president Harry S. Truman.) |
|
05 Aug 10 - 07:44 PM (#2959096) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri Joe, on the main threads page, click the box that says "Filter out". It's right under the word "filter" by the box you type in the word you want to filter for. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 07:56 PM (#2959112) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bugsy Jeri! Are you suggesting that One should actually edit out what's offensive to One on One's OWN computer?? Surely theres a Jobsworth somewhere that can do it for One?? (I'll shut the door behind me on my way out) Bugsy |
|
05 Aug 10 - 08:04 PM (#2959121) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Hi, Jeri- But the problem is, if today's Forum Menu has a Forbidden Word and if you're using the boss's computer, the boss's computer won't give you access to Mudcat. But if you use mhy Happy! link, you will avoid the Naughty Word threads and be able to access Mudcat from the boss's computer. THEN you can use the "filter out" option to root out the PG13 threads and look at the rest of Mudcat. Mind you, my boss is a nun, and she doesn't have a Naughty Word filter on your computer. Maybe that's why the Vatican is investigating American nuns. -Joe- |
|
05 Aug 10 - 08:55 PM (#2959167) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief If I asked why this thread is above the line, would I regret it? |
|
05 Aug 10 - 09:06 PM (#2959177) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing First I heard of any PG13 filter. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 09:11 PM (#2959179) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: The Fooles Troupe "First I heard of any PG13 filter. " PG13 filter tips were introduced for the under age smoking market.... |
|
05 Aug 10 - 09:23 PM (#2959183) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Ebbie Just for the record, Brian May: you are not accurate as you say "when not a penny has been paid to Union Carbide's victims in India." I agree that the amount was obscenely low but government did do its thing. ver batim from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster Widow pension of the rate of Rs 200/per month (later Rs 750) was provided. One-time ex-gratia payment of Rs 1,500 to families with monthly income Rs 500 or less was decided. Each claimant was to be categorised by a doctor. In court, the claimants were expected to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that death or injury in each case was attributable to exposure. In 1992, 44 percent of the claimants still had to be medically examined. From 1990 interim relief of Rs 200 was paid to everyone in the family who was born before the disaster. The final compensation (including interim relief) for personal injury was for the majority Rs 25,000 (US$ 830). For death claim, the average sum paid out was Rs 62,000. Effects of interim relief were more children sent to school, more money spent on treatment, more money spent on food, improvement of housing conditions. The management of registration and distribution of relief showed many shortcomings. In 2007, 1,029,517 cases were registered and decided. Number of awarded cases were 574,304 and number of rejected cases 455,213. Total compensation awarded was Rs.1,546.47 crores. Because of the smallness of the sums paid and the denial of interest to the claimants, a sum as large as Rs 10 billion is expected to be left over after all claims have been settled. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 09:37 PM (#2959188) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Susanne (skw) Joe, I'm deeply offended by your suggestion that http://mysongbook.de contains no offensive language! There are gems like 'The Steggie' to be found. (Ok, not an offensive word in sight there - you'll have to picture it in your own mind ...) And admittedly, 'She Was A Rum One' or the bawdy version of 'John Anderson My Jo' are still missing but they will eventually be included! So please don't slander http://mysongbook.de. :-) |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:02 PM (#2959195) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,jade, can't be bothered doing cookie to be sensible now, when you talk to someone face to face of course it depends on who you are talking to as to what sort of language you use. however, this isn't face to face, it isn't instant. this is the type of place you get to know peoples writing styles and decide whether to read them or not. banning swearing on tv wouldn't be permitted. if it is there and you don't like it, you have the choice to turn over. if i were talking to a friend i would swear, it is how i express myself in everyday terms. if i were talking to someone in an official copacity, then of course i would keep it clean. that also applies to parents, or grandparents. now apart from messing around, i don't noramlly swaer alot online, as i have time to consider alternatives. in real life you don't get that. although sometimes i wish there were a delete button! take care all jade x x x x x |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:04 PM (#2959197) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Q (Frank Staplin) Kids seem to know a heck of a lot more about bodily uses and language describing bodily contact than I do. Who or what is protected by 'clean' language nowadays? Anyone using the current complete Oxford English Dictionary will find an entire column on fuck. An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 10:34 PM (#2959214) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it. But why? It's just becoming meaningless fluff. What are people going to use when they REALLY need to show they're angry? They say that it's possible the universe will end in a blah heat-death soup where everything is exactly the same temperature and consistency and nothing happens or changes. Our language is growing that way now. As we overuse hot words we make them cooler and cooler, until they all die a heat death and we all speak in a monotone and have no way to show excitement or anger or any other strong emotion. It's like 1984 but we're doing it to ourselves. |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:22 PM (#2959227) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos The incarnation of that intellectual entropy is the movie "Idiocracy". A |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:28 PM (#2959230) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Stilly River Sage Just noticed this thread. So someone who has all of 41 posts here at Mudcat is offended and wants the site to change? What hubris. Please, someone help the man find a site more suited to him. Maybe Lawrence Welk fans have something he would like. SRS |
|
05 Aug 10 - 11:54 PM (#2959239) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief Maybe Lawrence Welk fans have something he would like. Mitch "Sing along with Mitch" Miller just died. I'm sure there is a resurgence of interest in Mitch, and maybe there's a new website with a policy about language that would suit our tender noob. |
|
06 Aug 10 - 12:33 AM (#2959253) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer I thought this thread was "deja vu all over again," but I couldn't find the previous discussion until just now. You'll see other threads on the subject in the crosslinks at the top of this thread. We came up with the PG13 tags in the Bawdy song thread. We were not able to get a permanent, cookie-enabled PG13 block, but we did work up a filter that will do the trick. If you are on a computer that blocks you from Mudcat because of profanity, Google Mudcat FAQ and go to the FAQ page. I added this to the first message of the FAQ in 2005.
Or as a link you can bookmark: |
|
06 Aug 10 - 02:39 AM (#2959272) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Monique Kids being chocked, true stories… My sister started teaching some 35 odd years ago in a class of 3 years old in a neighborhood where the kids would say "bugger off, you cunt" to one another as easily as others say "Hi, how are you doing?" Once one of her student was sobbing desperately "What happened?" and the little girl pointed at another one "She called me naughty!" A friend of mine teaching in pre-school (age 3) asked one of her boys "Where do you live?" (in French "Où tu habites?" pronounced "où t'habites" when you speak fast) and the boy said "Là!" ("There!") pointing at his groin because he'd understood "Où ta bite?" (Where('s) your cock?) In both cases, guess who was shocked! IMO many people tend to want to protect their own sweet vision of childhood. If they want to protect the actual children why don't they use some parental control software and/or do they let the children surf on the internet unattended? |
|
06 Aug 10 - 04:32 AM (#2959302) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: The Fooles Troupe "An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it. " And I refuse to watch ANY program with that Foul Mouth C*** in it! |
|
06 Aug 10 - 12:00 PM (#2959489) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: TopcatBanjo Chortle. As a relative newbie to Mudcat I am quite taken aback by how much is permitted here. Swearing doesn't bother me (I use far too much "bad" language myself, must try to cut down) but don't often feel the need to do so much online. I'm probably more taken aback by what seem to be the complete lack of limits on here in terms of being able to say WTF you like to anyone with seemingly no consequences, in terms of banning/threads or posts being deleted etc. Talking of UK/US forum characteristics, in my (admittedly fairly limited) experience the Americans tend to be far, far more puritanical. For instance, on the Banjo Hangout you can't even say "damn" or "hell", much less anything stronger!! And in general they get very touchy about what you might call robust debate, which makes it all rather anodyne and boring, although there is lots of good stuff in terms of musical resource, playing advice etc. On the other end of the scale a motorcycling forum I used to be on a lot is even more "robust" than here in terms of swearing and arguments. But it does have software which blocks "profanity" but then people just write "cnut" and so forth...! Different strokes eh? |
|
06 Aug 10 - 01:00 PM (#2959534) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Steve Shaw I thought Cnut was a Danish king who couldn't stem the flow of the tide... I think I see the connection! |
|
06 Aug 10 - 01:18 PM (#2959549) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: sciencegeek It is pretty evident that there is absolutely no way to please everyone all the time - or even most of the time, so the obvious fall back position is that when a site is formed and is moderated, that the owners of the site make the ground rules. They set up rules that conform to their beliefs and sensibilities. No one is forced to visit their site or agree with their standards, nor should they be expected to conform to anyone eles's standards... unless there is jail time associated with non-conformance. ( joke here, guys) Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder - so is "inappropriate" language (or whatever else is being objected to. And anyone who is truely upset by some of the threads on this site is perfectly free to go elsewhere to find less "disturbing" material. Enjoy the view from your bellybutton. |
|
06 Aug 10 - 02:07 PM (#2959582) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D color me obstinately logical and tedious....but.... Joe...re: "If **you** (my emphasis) are on a computer that blocks you from Mudcat because of profanity, Google Mudcat FAQ....etc." How, (he asks guilelessly), is that supposed to help my favorite example of a casual user who tries to drop in, but can't GET in to read your well-done explanation, because there is a thread with 'fuck' in the title showing for a few days? If one is a regular user, and knows the issue, and just happens to have a temporary problem on a 'protected' computer, and has read the FAQ or remembers this thread...why, all well & good. Otherwise, they get the idea that the **site** is on a forbidden list....and.... *shrug*. (Before 14 more folks make comments about free speech and for or against censorship, I repeat...I am NOT advocating censorship of lyrics or discussion, but merely looking for a way to avoid filtering programs from keeping out those who don't KNOW what is here.) |
|
06 Aug 10 - 02:33 PM (#2959604) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: MikeL2 Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: sciencegeek - PM Date: 06 Aug 10 - 01:18 PM Hi sciencegeek Couldn't have put it better myself. Each to his own and if anyone doesn't like what the moderators do.....well you know where the door is !! cheers MikeL2 |
|
06 Aug 10 - 03:18 PM (#2959632) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Hi, Bill- When we last visited this issue in 2005, I counted the days since Mudcat's inception that the word "fuck" had appeared on the Forum Menu - 75 days from 1996-2005. I asked who had been barred from Mudcat because of profanity on the Forum Menu, and very few said they had actually been blocked. We have devised a solution for the few "regulars" who encounter the problem. If they're blocked, all they have to do is Google Mudcat FAQ and use the Filter in the first message of the FAQ. Therefore, I must conclude that it isn't much of a problem. Now, I admit that some people on library computers might be blocked from access to the Forum Menu at times - but I would guess that most people first get to Mudcat by Googling the lyrics of a song and finding it in a thread, not the Forum menu. The people who come to Mudcat through the Forum Menu, are generally people who have been here before. Therefore, I must again conclude that it isn't much of a problem. I still cringe when I see "fuck" and "cunt" and "nigger" on the Forum Menu (and I cringe when I type these words now), but euphemization is far more repulsive to me. -Joe- |
|
06 Aug 10 - 05:00 PM (#2959707) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D Joe...when I worked in grocery stores many years ago, we were told to take ALL complaints seriously and treat ANY 'store problems' we saw the same way. His feeling was "if a potential customer is frustrated and disappointed and goes away, we have no way of tracking what happened and can't address their concerns." In the same way, a survey of problems encountered by regulars really doesn't deal with or anticipate problems which 'might' have occurred with those who found the 'door closed' and never came back. (It reminds me of the sign "If you can't read this sign, call 1-800-555-1234") "...75 days from 1996-2005." And since? "I would guess that most people first get to Mudcat by Googling the lyrics of a song ...etc.. That 'might' be so.... but maybe we ought to worry a bit about whether our guesses were accurate? *grin* "..euphemization is far more repulsive to me." *shrug*...as is obvious, I think the slight 'euphemization' of just titles, with full text available INSIDE a thread, is minor..... Ok...I've said all I can....I'll put the soapbox back in the corner now... |
|
06 Aug 10 - 05:08 PM (#2959712) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing I think the slight 'euphemization' of just titles, with full text available INSIDE a thread, is minor..... Exactly. Joe, does the PG13 filter out racist terms or just the usual fuck etc.? |
|
06 Aug 10 - 05:30 PM (#2959726) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Max Blame me, not the moderators. It is my rule. I am not careless, thoughtless or crass. It is with much thought and great purpose that it is so. I am sorry that you are offended and I do regret that we cannot provide a more suitable environment for you. Just as I cannot revise the histories of our lands and lives, although not proud of some of it, I cannot leave the details of it on this site behind asterisks and bleeps. Words don't hurt people, forgetting them does. |
|
06 Aug 10 - 06:06 PM (#2959754) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Thanks, Max. I've never had a disagreement with Bill D before, and I was wavering.... Kat, the "PG13" tags, much as I hate them, are only present when they are inserted. They aren't automatically triggered by naughty words. If we find that people are getting blocked because of bad-word filters, THEN we can insert the PG13 tags. So far, I have seen no need, but we developed the tags in case a need arises. If you've studied sea songs to any extent, you know how hard it is to get the actual words of real sea songs. Generations of collectors obfuscated the genuine lyrics behind their euphemisms. The singers themselves changed lyrics because they didn't want to offend upper-class Caucasian collectors. And to some extent, what we have left is entirely suitable for children's records, but hardly a realistic collection of sea songs. That's why I'm sensitive about euphemizing folk songs - because then it starts looking like it's the right thing to do, to obscure reality behind what we think reality ought to be. For those who love folk music, cultivating the ethic of euphemization is dangerous path to take. I prefer to a call a spade a spade - which, by the way, is NOT a racist remark. -Joe- |
|
06 Aug 10 - 06:14 PM (#2959758) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rafflesbear your house, your houserules but the suggestion that the details of the histories of our lands and lives can only be communicated properly with swear words in the thread titles of the music section of Mudcat is interesting |
|
06 Aug 10 - 07:09 PM (#2959775) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Our language is an interesting beast. Rafflesbear speaks of swear words, although we really aren't talking here of swearing at all. In fact, I can't think right off of any situation where people swear objectionably any more. I found a good list - the words people are objecting to here are profane, obscene, blasphemous or scatological (traditionally); and also racist and sexist (in these modern times). I guess for me, the only words I find objectionable are hateful words. -Joe- |
|
06 Aug 10 - 07:51 PM (#2959798) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May Well said Max and thanks to Joe too. There are just too many places, both real and virtual, where 'freedom' is a joke. (See above referring to the Banjo site, the Acoustic Guitar forum is similarly afflicted). Undeniably political, but in UK there is actually legislation to prevent the indigenous population stating simple truths. Sadly, that constraint does not apply to so many of those that the law was originally intended to protect. It's left us in a situation where 'we' have fewer rights and subject to outrageous exploitation. Self confessed terrorists exhorting hate and intolerance at the taxpayers' expense This site makes me feel better because I can just 'say' what I think. I don't usually swear on forums, there's little need to do so. BUT, I abhor being told I can't do something - especially by sanctimonious, judgemental, busy-bodies who presumably go through life wincing at every comment they hear in the street. So, well done - you'll rarely see me swear, but thanks for the freedom to do so if I feel so moved, it IS appreciated. |
|
06 Aug 10 - 08:47 PM (#2959822) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos Max: I agree with your perspective, whole heartedly. I don't use four-letter words unless I am using them as intended, to describe scatological functions, sexual appetites or actions, or peaks of momentary disapprobation. I use the to encourage perverse objects such as frozen bults to cooperate with me. I use them to chastise unexpected obstacles such as doorknobs or small boulders when I encounter them too enthusiastically. But I don't use them to --for example-- describe mini-cephalic obstructionist or reactionary prepubescent pea-headed attitudes on the part of the less than bright. That would be unkindly. A |
|
06 Aug 10 - 08:50 PM (#2959823) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Oh, you're in fine form tonight, Amos.... |
|
06 Aug 10 - 10:14 PM (#2959849) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing I was just asking, Joe. As BillD said, we're not talking about euphemizing the lyrics. When the Run Nigger Run thread title came up, years ago, many of us were concerned about what the casual visitor might think of the site if they saw that first thing. Max, you may say that words don't hurt people, but I don't agree, esp. when it comes to younger folks. Words can be very hurtful, esp. when written; with the written word there is a permanency which gives an everlasting effect. Regardless, I do respect the scholarship here and the authenticity of the age-old ballads, sea songs, etc., but like Bill, I'd just as soon see some care taken in the titles only of threads. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 05:58 AM (#2959978) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Howard Jones I think the question about visitors to the site being blocked by certain words in thread titles is a red herring. Why are they being blocked? It seems to me there are two possibilities: The first is that the content settings in your browser or security software on your own PC are blocking the site. The solution is simple - change the settings. The other is that the site is blocked by restrictions set by your employer on a PC at work. However in most companies private browsing is not allowed, or at least is strictly controlled. Again, the answer is simple - you probably shouldn't be looking at Mudcat at work in the first place, so accept the restrictions and wait until you get home. Neither situation is a good reason to change the policy. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 06:58 AM (#2959998) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Tim Leaning Sean MC I agree its disgusting. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 11:12 AM (#2960054) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: mousethief Howard -- the exception to your scenarios is people who are surfing from the public library and don't have a computer at home. Probably not a lot of those visiting Mudcat, I know. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 01:20 PM (#2960119) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Howard Jones Mousethief, that had occurred to me but I doubted whether many people wanting to use an internet forum would rely on using a public PC - but I may be wrong. Surely there is a way of getting individual sites unblocked if you can satisfy the library authorities that it is legitimate? |
|
07 Aug 10 - 02:29 PM (#2960164) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu I've said it many times before... The Mudcat Café is the best Café because the "coffee" is free and and so is the "speech"... thanks to Max. His dedication to free speech with only one simple rule has made this community what it is. And I, frankly, am darn happy that he has done so. Fact is, if Max did not do so, far more people would leave than the odd (and I mean that BOTH ways) affronted visitor. Here's your hat and coat and come again when you can't stay so long. PS... if children are offened, you are a piss poor parent. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 02:41 PM (#2960173) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri The "one simple rule" is a lot harder for some to follow than keeping certain words out of their vocabulary. The latter involves reigning in language and the former, reigning in their emotions such as outrage, scorn. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 02:55 PM (#2960182) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Bert Sean Mc, Mudcat does have something for you Here |
|
07 Aug 10 - 02:56 PM (#2960183) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu I am guilty of same, Jeri. But, only in response to (percieived) provocation. If I ever grow up and lose my Irish/French temper... oh, who am I kidding? Myself? I was brought up to never back down and to come big or stay home. I am a gnu, eh? >;-) |
|
07 Aug 10 - 05:34 PM (#2960273) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: John MacKenzie Are we really discussing how Mudcat is run? Usually threads that do that, get shut down pronto! |
|
07 Aug 10 - 06:12 PM (#2960288) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D We're only discussing the bylaws....vol.4, article 27, paragraph 3, sub-section 19, lines 3-17. You HAVE read those, haven't you? |
|
07 Aug 10 - 07:55 PM (#2960320) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Stringsinger No censorship is required. Decency in behavior is suggested. |
|
07 Aug 10 - 09:58 PM (#2960355) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos I think it is a courteous thing not to make thread titles seem vulgar or ribald unnecessarily, and not to use harsh terms where more precise ones will serve. Not to say I don't occasionally resort to vulgarities in a fit of colloquial creativity. Sheet-fahr, boy, no question! A |
|
08 Aug 10 - 03:00 AM (#2960447) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity So, ONE day, and for ONE day only, Sean Mc, opens a thread (this one), and it goes on, for another 161 posts, mine will make 162, and Sean is never heard from again!.......interesting. Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing! GfS |
|
08 Aug 10 - 04:38 AM (#2960467) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: John MacKenzie I suspect Sean Mc is an alias for an existing member. Why else would a thread which belongs in BS, have stayed in the music related section for so long? |
|
08 Aug 10 - 05:36 AM (#2960482) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing! That's a beautiful description for it!! LOL! |
|
08 Aug 10 - 05:39 AM (#2960484) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu I apopolgize for my "piss poor" choice of words in my 07 Aug 10 - 02:29 PM post. As pointed out to me by PM, there is a big difference between being "offended" and being "hurt". |
|
08 Aug 10 - 05:52 AM (#2960487) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: John MacKenzie Well that's you fucked for being both hurt AND offended mate :) |
|
08 Aug 10 - 09:47 AM (#2960538) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: sciencegeek Dear GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM Date: 08 Aug 10 - 03:00 AM So, ONE day, and for ONE day only, Sean Mc, opens a thread (this one), and it goes on, for another 161 posts, mine will make 162, and Sean is never heard from again!.......interesting. Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing! GfS I too pondered on how worked up folks got on this thread, while the originator & one other were barely heard from.... HOWEVER, it does point out one or more "hot buttons" that people around the world same in common. Mudcat - thanks to the worldwide web- has an international membership & audience. While cultural values may vary, people learn at a young age what is or is not appropriate in their situation. What they do not seem to be taught is to recognize that their values may differ significantly from others and that difference is not a "bad thing". Our "disgusted" posters may only have been intending to stir up the pot... but it is never a bad thing to go back an revisit one's assumption/position and ensure ones self that it still makes as much sense as it did before. I applaud Max for his clear sighted commitment to an ideal that I happen to share, not because it adheres to some "party line", but because it seems the most logical and fair minded. So, thank you, Max. |
|
08 Aug 10 - 10:39 AM (#2960554) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Peter K (Fionn) Well... If it hadn't been for the phantom Sean Mc, I would never have learnt that "tits" is banned from American radio. (It really is?) So some little purpose has been served by his entertaining jape. |
|
08 Aug 10 - 11:57 AM (#2960579) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D 'tits' is merely one of the words in the famous comedy routine by George Carlin.. "The seven dirty words are seven English-language words that comedian George Carlin first listed in 1972 in his monologue "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television". At the time, the words were considered highly inappropriate and unsuitable for broadcast on the public airwaves in the United States, whether radio or television. As such, they were avoided in scripted material, and bleep-censored in the rare cases in which they were used; broadcast standards differ in different parts of the world, then and now, although most of the words on Carlin's original list remain taboo on American broadcast television as of 2010. The list was not an official enumeration of forbidden words, but rather was compiled by Carlin. Nonetheless, a radio broadcast featuring these words led to a Supreme Court decision that helped establish the extent to which the federal government could regulate speech on broadcast television and radio in the United States."
(from Wikipedia) |
|
08 Aug 10 - 12:05 PM (#2960583) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: kendall Yawn |
|
08 Aug 10 - 01:43 PM (#2960636) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Peter K: "Well... If it hadn't been for the phantom Sean Mc, I would never have learnt that "tits" is banned from American radio..." ....But not from the silver screen!! ..Ahh, sweet mysteries of life. 'Udderly' amazing! GfS |
|
09 Aug 10 - 07:15 AM (#2961021) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Tootler Some years ago a member of a forum I used to belong to (I forget which now) spent a great deal of effort trying (unsuccessfully) to persuade AOL to unblock his website in the USA. It had been blocked because one page contained the word "tits" times. He was an ornithologist and the tits in question were members of a species of small bird widespread in the Northern Hemisphere - including N.America, though they are known by other names there. More info on tits in Wikipedia. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 07:26 AM (#2961028) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: VirginiaTam name of the site is Mudcat. Note: mud is dirty hence dirty words perfectly acceptable. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 10:23 AM (#2961109) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D You know.... I wonder if AOL and others bothered to block 'teats', which is the correct spelling of what they were trying to block. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 10:39 AM (#2961121) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray I wonder, how does all this filthier-than-thou stuff fit in with the hysterical hullabaloo caused when I defended someone's right to call me a c**t without having their posts deleted? Excommunications were called for, cringing apologies demanded & I received some very colourful Pontifical Missives (to say the least) for the sort of thing that is chuckled over by fans of Catspaw49, many of whom, said Pontiff included, were in the forefront of the righteous outrage. For those who missed this fascinating episode of Mudcat Folklore checkout the True Traditional Music thread which was split off by Papal Decree into the True Traditional Music-uncivilised annex. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 11:52 AM (#2961168) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: PHJim I do not like seeing bad language being used to slander another poster nor used for shock value, but I'd hate to see the removale of "bawdy songs and backroom ballads", to quote either Oscar Brand or Ed McCurdy. These are a part of the folk tradition and they belong on this site. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 01:34 PM (#2961252) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Andymac I think it's interesting that the original poster only re-appeared once, and then only to fan the dying embers back to life. I'm on the UK side of the pond but wasn't it an American president who said " I may not agree with what you say, but I will die to defend your right to say it"? Anyone who wants "swear" words or purported profanity removed is, in my opinion, a prude who doesn't understand the tradition nor appreciate the vernacular and the way in which lnguage evolves. There are streets in England known as Grape Lane; their origins came from being called Gropecunt Lane. According to Wikipedia, the name was first known from 1561 and it was in regular usage. So, since I could look up freely on wikipedia, I also looked around a bit but there was no "Sean Mc" complaining that wikipedia should clean up its act.. I couldn't agree more with the comments from Max and Joe. Andymac |
|
09 Aug 10 - 01:47 PM (#2961259) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing BillD, I was quite surprised last night while watching Mad Men in which the main character's alias was "Dick." The actors said it just fine, it wasn't bleeped out, BUT we had closed captioning on for a movie we'd watched the other night and lo and behold, for the hearing impaired the name "Dick" was shown as "D666." Each time, they had a bleeped word, they used the "666" with whatever designator they had. I wonder what the religious extremists make of that! |
|
09 Aug 10 - 02:44 PM (#2961304) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge Wikianswers says: - "Who said I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it? In: Famous Quotations [Edit categories] [Improve] Though these words are regularly attributed to Voltaire, they were first used by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing under the pseudonym of Stephen G Tallentyre in "The Friends of Voltaire" (1906), as a summation of Voltaire's beliefs on freedom of thought and expression. Another possible source for the quote was proposed by Norbert Guterman, editor of "A Book of French Quotations," who noted a letter to M. le Riche (February 6, 1770) in which Voltaire is quoted as saying: "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" ("Monsieur l'abbé, je déteste ce que vous écrivez, mais je donnerai ma vie pour que vous puissiez continuer à écrire"). This remark, however, does not appear in the letter. voltare Voltaire is most often credited with the saying, but many believe that this is a widespread mistake, and that the quote was originally said by Ewelyn Beatrice Hall. There is no definite answer to this question." I always thought it was Voltaire. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 02:54 PM (#2961315) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge I should point out that the French quoted does not translate to the English phrase usually used and Wikianswers translates it accurately (my French is at least good enough for that). |
|
09 Aug 10 - 03:08 PM (#2961327) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: John MacKenzie It's still a BS thread though. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 03:15 PM (#2961339) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge It grieves me Giok, but I agree. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 03:18 PM (#2961341) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D 666!! I'm SURE arcane forces are at work in the auto-captioning program! (ummm...is there such a thing as anti-exorcism?) |
|
09 Aug 10 - 03:25 PM (#2961349) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu Jonh, Richard... perhaps it's staying above the line as a discussion of site policy for those who would not normally go below or guests who would not be interested in doing so? Otherwise, yup. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 03:27 PM (#2961351) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Brian May I've literally just packed in the Acoustic Guitar Forum over 'blunt instrument' censorship. God help you if you are a carpenter, you can't have a bastard file, even though it's been called that for 100s of years. Can't say 'damn' either - apparently the Hollywood line 'Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn' would be cut as well. I abhor that kind of sanctimonious, self-righteous, intolerant claptrap. Bible thumping, conservative, middle America, really ought to put its own backyard in order before oppressing people using (correctly) their own language! Outrageous. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 05:16 PM (#2961444) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: John MacKenzie But we're not allowed to discuss site policy, as we have been told many many times before! |
|
09 Aug 10 - 05:34 PM (#2961459) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge Gosh, better not discuss the offspring of Henry VIII either. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 05:41 PM (#2961469) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D John... don't press the issue,hmmm? 'Site policy' also includes the right of 'management' to make judicious exceptions for special circumstances. The 'naughty word' issues takes some explaining. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 05:47 PM (#2961476) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jeri The thing that trumps everything else is Max's having once said any thread he's posted to is not to be messed with. Of course, what he actually said was that nothing should be deleted from any thread he's posted to, but I think that means the whole thread as well as posts. |
|
09 Aug 10 - 06:09 PM (#2961501) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jim Carroll I was inclined to accept Steve Gardham's idea that this thread is a wind-up. Surely we've lost enough of our traditional repertoire to the Mrs Grundy who would antiscepticise our folk songs to the stage where we sit around singing 'Ten Green Bottles' though, thinking about it, I used to know a pretty randy version of that one time. "these songs have nothing to do with the folk tradition and have no place here." Bollocks - if you'll excuse the expression (or if you won't). Our repertoire is full of bawdy, erotic, even obscene songs, and long may that be the case. Even our childrens repertoire has them, though the Opies once shamefully described the kids who sang them as "ogre children'. We lost many of them thanks to some of the opinions expressed here, but we still have D'urfey's 'Pills to Purge Melancholy' and Farmer's 'Merry Songs and Ballads". Many of the collectors bowed to Victorian hypocricy and either didn't take down the songs, or castrated them for publication, but many had the good sense to take them down an put them aside for a more enlightned age - nice to see Peter Buchan's 'Secret Songs of Silence' available at long last after a century and a half (two versions of it even). This is one that managed to slip through the net; an example that sex is there to be celebrated, not to be ashamed of. As MacColl wrote in is introduction to his annual stage show, The Festival of Fools, "Let fornication thrive". Jim Carroll TH'OWD CHAP CAME OWER T' BANK From the singing of Harold Slaeden, Openshaw, Manchester, Easter 1934 Recorded by Ewan MacColl and Joan Littlewood Th' owd chap came ower t' bank bawling for his tea, Saw a pair o' mucky clogs where his owd clogs should be; "Come here wife, come here wife, what's this here I see? How come this pair o' mucky clogs where my owd clogs should be?" "O, y'owd "bugger, you daft bugger, it's plain as plain can be, They're just a couple of pickle jars me owd mam sent to me. "O, I've been ower hills and dales me lass, and many a grassy moor, But girt hob nails on a pickle jar I've never seen before." T'owd chap came ower t' bank bawling for his tea, Saw a coat on back o' t' door where his owd coat should be; "Come here wife, come here wife, what's this here I see? How come this coat on back o' t' door where my owd coat should be?" "O y'owd bugger, you daft bugger, it's plain as plain can be, It's just an owd pudding cloth me owd mam sent to me" "O I've been ower hills and dales me lass, and many a grassy moor, But buttons on a pudding cloth I've never seen before." Th'owd chap came ower the bank bawling for his tea, Saw a head on't pillow where his owd head should be. "Come here wife, come here wife, what's this here I see? How come this head on t' pillow where my owd head should be?" "O, y'owd bugger, you daft bugger, it's plain as plain can be, That's just a girt big turnip me owd mam sent to me." "O, I've been ower hills and dales me lass, and many a grassy moor, But a girt big turnip full of teeth I've never seen before." T'owd chap came ower the bank bawling for his tea, Saw a pair of hairy cods where his owd cods should be. "Come here wife, come here wife, what's this here I see? How come this pair of hairy cods where my owd cods should be?" "O, y'owd. bugger, you daft bugger, it's plain as plain can be, They're just a couple of garden spuds me owd mam sent to me." "O, I've been ower hills and dales me lass, and many a grassy moor, But garden spuds with hairs on I've never seen before." Th' owd chap came ower the bank bawling for his tea, Saw a great big standing prick where his owd prick should be. "Come here wife, come here wife, what's this here I see ? How come this great big standing prick where my owd prick should be?" "O, y'owd bugger, you daft bugger, it's plain as plain can be, Its just a home grown carrot me owd mam sent to me." "O, I've been ower hills and dales and many a grassy moor, But a carrot digging a great big hoyle I've never seen before." |
|
10 Aug 10 - 06:21 AM (#2961843) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Just found this a bit earlier in the thread. "OP" is bog standard internetwebspeak. If people can't speak web, they should log out and watch TV." If people can't speak web, they are usually well adjusted people. Nobody owns the web, nobody has to speak another language. The keyboard and ASCII character recognition means that normal English (or Swahili if it turns you on) is more than enough to be "allowed" to speak as you wish. Hopefully, in the same way as you actually speak. And.. in the spirit of this thread; What a stupid fucking statement, born of stupid fucking arrogance. Far more offensive than the Anglo Saxon adjectives I have just used, by any standard... |
|
10 Aug 10 - 06:29 AM (#2961852) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Will Fly Jim - great song - and one that surfaces all over the place. There are several American versions - one that I recall being "Cabbage Head". This version's all the better for being from Lancashire, though! |
|
10 Aug 10 - 06:33 AM (#2961857) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Will Fly Jim - forgot to ask: is there a tune available for this somewhere? |
|
10 Aug 10 - 06:53 AM (#2961867) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rob Naylor Jim: "O, I've been ower hills and dales me lass, and many a grassy moor, But girt hob nails on a pickle jar I've never seen before." Surely that should be "clog irons"? Clogs were never hob-nailed, but fitted with u-shaped irons. At least in Yorkshire...bloody Lancastrians might have done it differently. Pedantic Rob |
|
10 Aug 10 - 06:57 AM (#2961870) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rob Naylor Will: the tune would be the same as "Seven Drunken Nights", surely? It's just a bowdlerised version of the above, after all. |
|
10 Aug 10 - 07:26 AM (#2961884) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Will Fly Quite possibly, Rob - I've known quite a few tunes put to different versions of this song. Any road, who wants bloody white rose monkeys chippin' in when th'organ grinders grinding. I'm talkin' to't oil can, not to't rag... :-) |
|
10 Aug 10 - 07:41 PM (#2962476) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Betsy Joe, I bet you don't need all this shit . Well done to all you open minded adults who have posted . |
|
10 Aug 10 - 08:00 PM (#2962486) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bugsy Reading this thread reminded me of a childrens Movie called "The Never Ending Story" The only difference being, the movie was mildly interesting. Lets move on. CHeers Bugsy |
|
10 Aug 10 - 09:02 PM (#2962512) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: RobbieWilson I remember posting to a similar thread about 4 or 5 years ago. I work as a teacher and often log into mudcat in free time at school. My school, like many public systems, particularly those made available to children, has a filter which not only stops me looking at threads with words or topics which might be deemed unsuitable for children it would stop me looking at Mudcat at all if these words are in the thread title. There are no words which of themselves offend me. Offence always lies in usage and intention. Insistence on using words which will obviously exclude a chunk of the membership from the whole forum, never mind the particular discussion, when there are simple devices to get round the problem seems to me thoughtless and arrogant. But then again so often you see people in here whose sole aim seems to be to show how they are above us mear plebs. If I type in c**t, bas***d f**k or fcuk you know what the words are and I am obviosly getting round a filter. This is not Bowdlerisation, the meaning and the intended words are clear. When I speak I say what I mean to say to get my meaning across. When I use a computer I type what gets my message across. I avoid typing words which will lead to machines filtering what I want to say as I have no superiotity issue towards those poor suckers who have to put up with such things. |
|
10 Aug 10 - 09:16 PM (#2962516) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Bill D well said, Mr. Wilson... |
|
10 Aug 10 - 10:34 PM (#2962547) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: katlaughing Yes, well-said, RobbieWilson, thanks. |
|
11 Aug 10 - 01:38 AM (#2962591) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer I still haven't heard from anyone who was actually blocked from Mudcat because of a naughty song title on the Forum Menu; nor have I heard from anyone who was blocked and tried our workaround. I still, therefore, conclude that this really hasn't been a problem for people. There are lots of things that people post here that drive me absolutely crazy, things like smarminess, pettiness, and mindless repetition. For the most part, I'm expected to put up with them - and I get dumped on if I utter a word of complaint. If those things are permitted, then maybe it should be OK to post a naughty song here every now and then - complete with title. How 'bout if we permit one naughty song in exchange for every birthday thread? -Joe- |
|
11 Aug 10 - 04:11 AM (#2962633) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Tim Leaning So did we decide to clean up mudcat? |
|
11 Aug 10 - 12:44 PM (#2962971) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie I recall Billy Connolly years ago saying that fuck is an excellent word. it leaves you in no doubt as to the intention and is a definite word. He said that you never read a book with "Fuck off" he hinted...." in a sentence. For me, there are times when such expletives are necessary, not strictly necessary, but in order to give expression to a stance. I reckon the only time I get shirty about such use of language is when I see it as a substitute for vocabulary. I used to work down the pit and as an adjective, it was used by just about everybody in just about every sentence. When you got showered and went home, it was as if you were speaking a different language. |
|
11 Aug 10 - 01:22 PM (#2962998) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer No, Tim, I don't think we could ever come to an agreement on what to remove to "clean up Mudcat." I think we're better off learning to tolerate others having the freedom of expression that we'd like ourselves to have. Way back in the earliest days of Mudcat, we had a Mudcatter named Elsie who waged a one-woman war to keep Mudcat free of non-folk posts and non-folk lyrics. Other forces prevailed, and Elsie faded into the mists. Since then, we've tolerated almost everything but direct personal attacks, and we've had a tradition of freedom of posting that has continued to this day. And we folkie purists are still here, and we like our songs unexpurgated. All of us find elements of Mudcat distasteful. I have been soundly chastised for my dislike of birthday and "good thoughts" threads. If I had my druthers, I'd ban them - but a lot of Mudcatters wouldn't like that. I think we're best off leaving most things as they were posted, and satisfy ourselves by grumbling here and there about the things we don't like. In other words:
-Joe- |
|
11 Aug 10 - 01:23 PM (#2962999) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Amos "Fuck off," he hinted genteely. I love it! A |
|
11 Aug 10 - 07:36 PM (#2963272) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Did I say THAT, Amos? |
|
11 Aug 10 - 07:46 PM (#2963282) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,Betsy Well done (and said) Joe - I believe you're a worthy custodian of Mudcat. Who knows,in years to come,values may change either way, but for now I'll stick with yours - which roughly reflect mine . |
|
12 Aug 10 - 12:01 PM (#2963664) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: G-Force My, my, what a lot of fuss about a few naughty words! Also, judging by the length of the thread, a subject of surprising interest to many. What I find far more offensive and upsetting is the sheer bitchiness, bad manners and downright unkindness we sometimes read on Mudcat. Perhaps it's the people who post who should clean up their act! |
|
12 Aug 10 - 01:37 PM (#2963729) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Little Hawk Aha! Now you have your finger on the real problem, G-force. ;-) But there's nothing can be done about it. Believe me, I have tried (from time to time). One might as well tilt at windmills or try to empty the ocean with a bucket. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 07:19 AM (#2964223) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: RobbieWilson Perhaps I was not clear enough when I posted above. In the past Profanity has caused me problems and stopped me logging into Mudcat for weeks at a time. It depends where I work. 5 Years ago a poster called John Mehlberg posted a new "smutty" title virtually other day. It was not the threads which caused me a problem but the titles which meant that I could not access Mudcat at school at all, not through prudishness but because of the education authority (County) filter. I asked for a little thoughtfulness in thread titles and eventually the problem went away. However as recent events have shown it has always had the potential to raise its ugly head again. I have no problem with the idea that other people have different levels of what is acceptable, or even that occassionaly people in here express opinions which I find offensive. I can always decide to counter or ignore but only if I can get in the forum in the first place. It is not the individual words that bother me but the way people speak to each other and yes, Joe, It seems to me that that is pretty much what you did say in big bold letters |
|
13 Aug 10 - 07:41 AM (#2964230) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Zen My, my, what a lot of fuss about a few naughty words! Also, judging by the length of the thread, a subject of surprising interest to many. What I find far more offensive and upsetting is the sheer bitchiness, bad manners and downright unkindness we sometimes read on Mudcat. Perhaps it's the people who post who should clean up their act! I quite agree. The odd rude word doesn't bother me at all but what has made me stand back somewhat from Mudcat over the past year or two after 10 years as a member here has been the aggressivity and rudeness of a relatively small number of people who have unfortunately ruined a lot of otherwise useful threads. I know quite a number of 'Catters in person and know I am not alone in this. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 07:53 AM (#2964236) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,bumcat Yes, why not slap a few health and safety laws on Mudcat and cosh folksters if they ever stray from the path of the good and righteous! After all, traditionally folk songs have never included lyrics about bad behaviour have they?! I mean all those songs that ever include events that go against the ten commandments should be banned! They are far worse than a few naughty words surely! Let's rewrite history, why don't we and then pehaps we can censor all speech while we're at it and before you know it, we're all too afraid to sing any folk songs at all. How naive this thread is! |
|
13 Aug 10 - 08:50 AM (#2964267) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: RobbieWilson Sorry Bumcat, do you have trouble reading? Throughout this thread people have said do not restrict what people can say. never mind censor song words or singing. By putting language which will block the Forum Home page you exclude a number of interested parties from Mudcat. Nothing to do with religion, nothing to do with righteousness just simple practicalities of working peoples lives. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 09:06 AM (#2964278) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST I was being ironic. If you take care to examine the content of many traditional folk songs, you will find that they often describe events far ruder than a few bad words. So, Robbie Wilson. Can you read? and more to the point - can you understand what you have read? Perhaps if you read Jim Carroll's addition to this thread you might understand the orientation of my comment. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 09:25 AM (#2964288) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Don(Wyziwyg)T A bible belt preacher was leaving his church after delivering a hellfire sermon, when he was accosted by a man who grabbed his hand and shook it vigorously. "Parson, that was the best goddamn sermon I've heard in years" he said. "My son", said the preacher, "I appreciate the sentiment, but I must insist that you refrain from blasphemy and profanity on these holy premises". "Well padre, I'm surely sorry if I offended you, but I was so goddamned impressed that I want to donate twenty thousand dollars to your ministry". The preacher replied "No goddamn shit. Well FUCK ME!" Don T. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 02:38 PM (#2964525) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer Well, Robbie, keep my workaround in mind. if you do get blocked, Google Mudcat FAQ. There's a Filter in the first message of the FAQ, and you can use it to filter out PG13 threads. I realize that may not help library visitors who come here looking for songs, but I have a feeling that most of them get here by Google, bypassing the Forum Menu and its occasional naughty words. I once had a very obnoxious sister-in-law who would blurt out all sorts of puzzling things, and some of her sayings became family jokes. One thing that really got us was her tsk-tsk way of talking about people who "used the f-word." She was the first person I ever heard use that term, "f-word," and it always struck me as ridiculously prudish. Then I discovered the Berryman song, "A Chat With Your Mother," alternately titled F-Word in the Digital Tradition. I was pleased to see that Peter Berryman shares my view of the ridiculosity of euphemisms. Every time I see a blatant euphemism, I'm reminded of my stupid, obnoxious sister-in-law. So, for me, it's a gut issue. I don't want Mudcat to look stupid and obnoxious, even if it causes somebody to get blocked by a profanity filter now and then. Most likely, they'll find their way back some other day. If you're starting a thread and you want to euphemize a bad word, we're not going to stop you....but we're not going to euphemize away things that have been posted. But on the other hand, we will continue to prohibit personal attacks and intervene when they're reported. -Joe- |
|
13 Aug 10 - 02:54 PM (#2964531) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rafflesbear Is that personal attacks like stupid and obnoxious? |
|
13 Aug 10 - 03:36 PM (#2964555) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Joe Offer ...apologies to my (former) sister-in-law, who shall remain unnamed. I still have contact with her, and she's still a family joke, but I got divorced out of the family. I think when we say that Mudcat prohibits "personal attacks," we mean Mudcatters attacking other Mudcatters. There have been people who asked that we delete attacks on people like Barack Obama and Sarah Palin, but those petitions have been denied. I think the same applies to comments made about unnamed family pariahs. -Joe- |
|
13 Aug 10 - 03:47 PM (#2964570) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Rafflesbear Hey! We might even get Barack Obama and Sarah Palin and Nick Griffin joining Mudcat :-) |
|
13 Aug 10 - 03:47 PM (#2964571) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jim Carroll Guest Do you object to the song I put up or the comments surrounding it? Jim Carroll |
|
13 Aug 10 - 04:17 PM (#2964590) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: GUEST,bumcat No, I think your song's great Jim. However I do object to Mudcatters not making personal attacks on Sarah Palin! Can they also make personal attacks on David Cameron, Bill Gates and other supposedly do gooding obnoxious twats please? That also includes all PCPs. Thanks. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 04:26 PM (#2964600) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: gnu Joe... thank goodness cause my SiL still can't parboil shit for a tramp. She does make some meals amazingly well, but the odds are in favour of heartburn. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 04:29 PM (#2964602) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Richard Bridge I frequently insult David Cameron and Clegg his fag (that's "fag" as in boyservant at public, ie private, school, not fag as in US based male homosexual). However, surely they are malevolent, not the reverse. But I thought PCP was a hallucinogenic drug. |
|
13 Aug 10 - 04:51 PM (#2964614) Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act? From: Jim Carroll Sarah Palin - have I missed an opportunity to take a pop at Sarah Palin? - sod it!! Jim Carroll |