|
03 Feb 02 - 07:02 AM (#641195) Subject: - From: The Shambles I didn't want to give this thread a tile as I started it as a way for those contributors who are already ignoring threads from trolls or threads from counter-trolls to confirm, by not contributing to this thread also, that they were ignoring this thread also.
And requesting at the same time, some recognition from those that do contribute to such threads, that by ignoring threads from trolls and counter-trolls, these people are allowing the space for those that do respond, to continue a problem that need not even be a be problem if they also did not respond to treads from trolls or counter -trolls either.
|
|
03 Feb 02 - 07:03 AM (#641197) Subject: RE: - From: The Shambles |
|
03 Feb 02 - 07:04 AM (#641199) Subject: RE: - From: gnu |
|
03 Feb 02 - 07:36 AM (#641207) Subject: RE: - From: Gareth |
|
03 Feb 02 - 07:46 AM (#641212) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST |
|
03 Feb 02 - 09:14 AM (#641236) Subject: RE: - From: vectis |
|
03 Feb 02 - 09:18 AM (#641239) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST |
|
03 Feb 02 - 09:49 AM (#641255) Subject: RE: - From: Kenny B (inactive) |
|
03 Feb 02 - 10:44 AM (#641281) Subject: RE: - From: Mr Red |
|
03 Feb 02 - 11:39 AM (#641307) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST |
|
03 Feb 02 - 11:54 AM (#641317) Subject: RE: - From: Cobble |
|
03 Feb 02 - 12:07 PM (#641325) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST |
|
03 Feb 02 - 12:33 PM (#641334) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST,YOR |
|
03 Feb 02 - 12:35 PM (#641338) Subject: From: Dave the Gnome |
|
03 Feb 02 - 12:50 PM (#641348) Subject: RE: - From: mack/misophist OK |
|
03 Feb 02 - 01:08 PM (#641360) Subject: RE: - From: Hilary |
|
03 Feb 02 - 01:12 PM (#641366) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST,Flaming Troll I confirm that I am NOT replying to this thread Mind you, it has to be about the dumbest thread ever...
|
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:08 PM (#641386) Subject: RE: - From: The Shambles |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:11 PM (#641388) Subject: RE: - From: catspaw49 |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:11 PM (#641389) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST,Cookieless Member This thread is a load of moronic shit. Then again, why should this thread be any different from most Mudcat threads? |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:12 PM (#641390) Subject: RE: - From: John Routledge |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:24 PM (#641403) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST, Cookieless Member You are, of course, free to use the same anonymous handle as me. We are even in basic agreement about whether this thread serves any useful purpose or not (sorry, folks, but it was bound to be just another trap the trolls couldnt resist, apart from anything else). However, there the similarity ends though. |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:24 PM (#641404) Subject: RE: - From: Ebbie |
|
03 Feb 02 - 02:56 PM (#641417) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST,Peter I hereby confirm that: I will ignore every thread posted by a guest, for the guest is bad. I will not feel sorry for the guest including those who have posted as guest because they are new to mudcat, and don't understand the correct protocol. I will however laugh at, and think wonderful, anything and everything a member posts. I will never question any hurtful posts made by members. I will remember the one holy truth: members are good and guests are bad. Peter Seriously, though. Reread this thread, and tell me, honestly, if your posts would have been the same had the presenter rather than the performer been the 'catter' There's nothing wrong with cheering on your friends, but this place goes a little far imho
|
|
03 Feb 02 - 03:01 PM (#641422) Subject: RE: - From: katlaughing |
|
03 Feb 02 - 03:17 PM (#641431) Subject: RE: - From: Bill D |
|
03 Feb 02 - 03:25 PM (#641434) Subject: RE: - From: Gareth |
|
03 Feb 02 - 04:15 PM (#641457) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST
How does one confirm one is ignoring a site by letting one's resident cookie reveal one's visitation, thus disclosing that one isn't ignoring it? I can't solve this conundrum except by logging in as a guest to stay anonymous, though I am a regular member. A rather fluffy exercise. |
|
03 Feb 02 - 04:20 PM (#641461) Subject: RE: - From: The Shambles |
|
03 Feb 02 - 04:25 PM (#641466) Subject: RE: - From: brid widder |
|
03 Feb 02 - 05:03 PM (#641497) Subject: RE: - From: Bat Goddess |
|
03 Feb 02 - 05:09 PM (#641499) Subject: RE: - From: Nemesis |
|
03 Feb 02 - 05:31 PM (#641512) Subject: RE: - From: okthen |
|
03 Feb 02 - 05:54 PM (#641524) Subject: Sheep? From: GUEST, Cookieless Member Who's a Sheep? Well, there's... The Shambles gnu 03-Feb-02 07:04 AM Gareth 03-Feb-02 07:36 AM GUEST 03-Feb-02 07:46 AM vectis 03-Feb-02 09:14 AM GUEST 03-Feb-02 09:18 AM Kenny B 03-Feb-02 09:49 AM Mr Red 03-Feb-02 10:44 AM GUEST 03-Feb-02 11:39 AM Cobble 03-Feb-02 11:54 AM GUEST 03-Feb-02 12:07 PM GUEST,YOR 03-Feb-02 12:33 PM Dave the gnome 03-Feb-02 12:35 PM misophist 03-Feb-02 12:50 PM Hilary 03-Feb-02 01:08 PM The Shambles 03-Feb-02 02:08 PM catspaw49 03-Feb-02 02:11 PM John Routledge 03-Feb-02 02:12 PM Ebbie 03-Feb-02 02:24 PM katlaughing 03-Feb-02 03:01 PM Bill D 03-Feb-02 03:17 PM Gareth 03-Feb-02 03:25 PM The Shambles 03-Feb-02 04:20 PM brid widder 03-Feb-02 04:25 PM Bat Goddess 03-Feb-02 05:03 PM Hille 03-Feb-02 05:09 PM okthen 03-Feb-02 05:31 PM |
|
03 Feb 02 - 06:04 PM (#641531) Subject: RE: - From: PaulM As a member, who has tried to be helpful, I can only come to one conclusion. Utterlly pathetic I'm not sure if this is supposed to br a protest, but I can't see the police coming out to help.
|
|
03 Feb 02 - 06:32 PM (#641550) Subject: RE: - From: Gareth |
|
03 Feb 02 - 07:36 PM (#641586) Subject: RE: - From: RichM Cool...
A
Zen Thread |
|
03 Feb 02 - 08:28 PM (#641614) Subject: RE: - From: Bill D ~ |
|
03 Feb 02 - 08:47 PM (#641626) Subject: RE: - From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull I think this thread is stupid, there is nothing there.A case of the emperors new clothes? Or am I missing something? |
|
03 Feb 02 - 08:57 PM (#641633) Subject: RE: - From: hesperis DON'T POST TO THIS THREAD! Or this one. Or this. Or this one.. Or this one... Nice try Shambles. Too bad this thread is yet another repetition. |
|
04 Feb 02 - 02:05 AM (#641794) Subject: RE: - From: The Shambles |
|
04 Feb 02 - 03:26 AM (#641803) Subject: RE: - From: GUEST Thank you for refreshing this, Shambles. It was such a wonderful idea, and so original (as Hesperis pointed out) Oops, sorry, I forgot. You were the guy who had to bang on, again, and again, and again, and again about Weymouth Council in thread after thread after thread, even though only three other people were interested. You got little response, so you started again, and again, and again. Thank you for refreshing this, are lives are enriched by you |
|
04 Feb 02 - 03:43 AM (#641810) Subject: Obnoxious threads From: Joe Offer We've had some trolling problems lately. As always, the best way to respond to trolling is not to respond. A thread like this just makes things worse. A thread with a name like this causes problems for our search engines and such, so I'll rename it. -Joe Offer- |
|
04 Feb 02 - 03:49 AM (#641811) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Are you listening, Shambles?
A thread like this just makes things worsetosser |
|
04 Feb 02 - 05:20 AM (#641832) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
04 Feb 02 - 05:28 AM (#641835) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Shambles is a wanker Shambles is a wanker Tra la la la Tra la la la
|
|
04 Feb 02 - 09:39 AM (#641946) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST And I notice we have Mudcat member Wolfgang to thank for the continuation of Drumcree Part II. Must have taken the advice from "long threads" to heart. But no member trolling going on there, of course. |
|
04 Feb 02 - 10:11 AM (#641966) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST, Cookieless Member This thread does prove that members-with-cookies are just as responsible, if not more so, for the crap at Mudcat. Congratulations to The Shambles for proving that point and to all the other members who blankly posted for reenforcing it. |
|
04 Feb 02 - 10:26 AM (#641978) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST And god bless Wolfgang for the setting the bait. Best thread creep the Mudcats ever seen. Up the 'ra!
|
|
04 Feb 02 - 01:10 PM (#642130) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
04 Feb 02 - 01:19 PM (#642137) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST And Shambles still continues. A stupid thread which as Joe Offer has mentioned, can only make things worse. Does Shambles care? Oh, no. Shambles thinks he's right. And no one can tell him otherwise.
|
|
04 Feb 02 - 01:22 PM (#642141) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles Recent member epiphanies |
|
04 Feb 02 - 01:38 PM (#642158) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Guest, Memberless Cookie Ack! Say it ain't so, Joe! The unnamed thread now has a name! |
|
04 Feb 02 - 02:38 PM (#642212) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Ebbie Guest, Clueless Member, these 'blank posts' I regard as a silent protest. (Of course, now that I've spoken...) Ebbie |
|
04 Feb 02 - 02:43 PM (#642217) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST But that's the entire point, Ebbie A silent protest should be just that. Everyone who has posted to this thread is saying: "look at me! I'm making a silent protest" and as you've noted, that somewhat defeats the point... |
|
04 Feb 02 - 02:45 PM (#642219) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Ebbie Would you say the same thing, Guest, about masses of people silently pacing around a governmental agency? |
|
04 Feb 02 - 02:47 PM (#642222) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST No. That would be a silent anonymous protest. |
|
04 Feb 02 - 03:18 PM (#642243) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles Guest threads |
|
04 Feb 02 - 04:36 PM (#642315) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST And still Shambles persists! As David Coleman once said: "Quite, quite remarkable!" |
|
04 Feb 02 - 05:33 PM (#642370) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles Cookieless member |
|
04 Feb 02 - 05:39 PM (#642375) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Shambles, You're starting to look really pathetic here... Notice that no one else is joining in? I wonder why?
|
|
05 Feb 02 - 01:56 AM (#642749) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Ebbie |
|
05 Feb 02 - 01:59 PM (#643189) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: catspaw49 |
|
05 Feb 02 - 03:13 PM (#643253) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Ferret |
|
05 Feb 02 - 03:30 PM (#643266) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: RichM * |
|
06 Feb 02 - 02:07 AM (#643605) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles The Weakest Link The Digital Tradition |
|
12 Feb 02 - 02:15 PM (#648325) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Blackcatter |
|
12 Feb 02 - 02:16 PM (#648331) Subject: RE: - From: Blackcatter |
|
12 Feb 02 - 02:27 PM (#648338) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Thanks Blackcatter, for finally refreshing this. Even though the rest of us had been ignoring (oops! I mean silently protesting!) Shambles giving links to this thread all over the place in the last day or two, I'm sure you've made him feel validated now. A silent protest is a terrible thing to waste on Mudcat. |
|
12 Feb 02 - 02:34 PM (#648348) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: RichM (*) |
|
12 Feb 02 - 02:55 PM (#648370) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Hamshank |
|
12 Feb 02 - 06:02 PM (#648530) Subject: RE: - FUCK GUEST From: Blackcatter |
|
12 Feb 02 - 06:33 PM (#648560) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Gareth |
|
12 Feb 02 - 06:38 PM (#648570) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: bflat fen shui |
|
12 Feb 02 - 07:07 PM (#648610) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Unnamed Poster It's fenG shui, you silly rabbit. Please give me the name of your pusher; this is a great thread. |
|
12 Feb 02 - 07:09 PM (#648613) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Yes, SHAMBLES is a wanker |
|
12 Feb 02 - 08:56 PM (#648705) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Watch Max zap my posts. We're playing the refresh/delete game. And having so much fun doing it. I refresh anti-guest threads, Max deletes. |
|
13 Feb 02 - 05:51 AM (#648956) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
13 Feb 02 - 05:56 AM (#648962) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Noreen |
|
13 Feb 02 - 06:14 AM (#648969) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Son of the Mill Max, do somthing. |
|
13 Feb 02 - 06:18 AM (#648970) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Joe Offer It's pretty hard for us to "do something," when we have Mudcatters who insist on refreshing flame threads and keeping them alive. Why do you people feel compelled to respond to these trolls? I see that somebody is going through the troll threads and adding to them by posting a link to this thread. I know it's well-intentioned, but it just serves to keep the troll threads alive. -Joe Offer- When you post to a troll thread - when you post ANYTHING to a troll thread, you:
-Joe Offer- |
|
13 Feb 02 - 06:25 AM (#648973) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: catspaw49 CLICK |
|
13 Feb 02 - 07:15 AM (#648984) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
13 Feb 02 - 10:25 AM (#649116) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: jeffp |
|
13 Feb 02 - 11:14 AM (#649136) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Yes, take the pledge, folks. In teh New Mudcat World Order, all members will be required to Take The Pledge! Before each and every log-on, you will be required to pledge allegiance to Max and Mudcat, or you will not be allowed to remain a Mudcat netizen. Conform, conform, conform. No room for Mudcat dissenters here, by God! It is our folk forum right or wrong! Take the pledge! Take the pledge! |
|
13 Feb 02 - 11:37 AM (#649147) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Septic Tank |
|
13 Feb 02 - 11:55 AM (#649165) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: katlaughing |
|
13 Feb 02 - 12:35 PM (#649193) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
13 Feb 02 - 01:13 PM (#649217) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Lil' VanBone Why o' why did I read this thread? I skipped by perfectly good labelled threads that were likely quite interesting, but when it came to the one with no subject... |
|
13 Feb 02 - 03:06 PM (#649295) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
13 Feb 02 - 03:14 PM (#649303) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles Open letter from Max to guests |
|
15 Feb 02 - 06:55 AM (#650706) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: McGrath of Harlow |
|
15 Feb 02 - 07:04 AM (#650708) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Stu |
|
15 Feb 02 - 01:55 PM (#650943) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles I will not respond to a troll |
|
19 Feb 02 - 08:28 PM (#653715) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST,Who's cookie got tossed I think my cookie got tossed when I read this thread. (Haha) I used to frequent Mudcat, but am here only once a week or so now. And guess what? I'm getting really good at the guitar. I have a suggestion for those who have a hard time NOT responding to trolls... For every response you want to write, refrain! And instead, practice a song on your instrument. The degree of improvement you make on your instrument will measure how much you used to respond to trolls. You will be redirecting your energies, and actually have something to thank el-troll-o for: your much improved musicality! I suppose you're all laughing at me now. Ah, but if you could hear me play.... :o) Oh, and (the one above) I'm glad your cookie is memberless..... that is unless it is a gingerbread man. (Oh no! Not my gumdrop buttons.....) |
|
19 Feb 02 - 08:53 PM (#653726) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: Jeri Spaw, did you notice in your clickie of 13-Feb-02 - 06:25 AM, you forgot the 'www', and it still works?! Odd...very odd. |
|
19 Feb 02 - 09:18 PM (#653739) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: open mike got snagged by curiosity--what in the world would entice nearly 100 replies to a thread with no name? curiosity killed the cat--- and the desert killed the horse with no name..... |
|
20 Feb 02 - 09:13 AM (#653936) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST I believe the answer to your question "what in the world would entice nearly 100 replies to a thread with no name?" is: Idiots who are addicted to internet forums, and have serious self-control problems. This thread is, apparently, the Mudcat version of the nicotine patch. |
|
20 Feb 02 - 09:41 AM (#653966) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Can't stop yourself, Shambles, can you? Joe Offer,(the nearest thing that this place has to a moderator, and a wise man) has asked you to stop posting. Have you? No, because you always know best. This thread is doing harm. Please stop refreshing it, Shambles |
|
20 Feb 02 - 09:51 AM (#653971) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Or maybe it is like a morphine drip for Shambles? |
|
20 Feb 02 - 04:45 PM (#654189) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread--the second 100? From: GUEST,Won't put my cookie on this thread Don't know about the drug analogy, but the behavior is definately anal retentive. . . Whoever is behind the GUEST responses to each of Shambles' refreshments seems to have a similar ailment. Ah! That's why the shit hits the fan around here! This tit for tat stuff doesn't get anyone anywhere. It's like Israel and Palestine, slapping each other back and forth, and every time Israel hits a little harder then says "Okay, NOW we want peace!" As long as you need to get the last word in, that's the way it's going to stay. Mudcatters need to just pass over the insulting guests and respond to the good guests. It's the mature thing to do.
|
|
20 Feb 02 - 04:48 PM (#654198) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST Agreed, GUEST. I'll be more than willing to accept that I've been an arsehole, when Shambles admits that he has been too. Waiting...
|
|
20 Feb 02 - 05:41 PM (#654232) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST My god, whoever said that Mudcat flame wars between guests and members is "like Israel and Palestine" is just plain sick. Really sick. |
|
01 Sep 02 - 11:11 AM (#775172) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: The Shambles |
|
05 Sep 02 - 12:55 AM (#777265) Subject: RE: - unnamed thread From: GUEST already ignoring threads from trolls or threads from counter-trolls to confirm shambles is a troll |