|
24 Jan 05 - 08:15 PM (#1387696) Subject: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Refreshing Hey! I just realized you can't Refresh a closed thread (that's pretty sneeky Mr Offer, Sir, but I understand why). See BS: Sir jOhn's Closed Mind, er, ClosedThread about to go ofen' tugh end of tugh BS page into oblivion (probly whar hit belongs). Slur jOhn ain't even able to refreash, or refersh or |
|
25 Jan 05 - 01:11 AM (#1387849) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Ayup. You can link to a closed thread, but you can't bring it to the top of the forum. We have various reasons for closing threads. Most often, it's to direct music discussions to the primary discussion of the subject, so the topic doesn't get split up too much. Occasionally, we'll close a thread that's gotten nasty, to try to cool things down without deleting posts in the thread that may be quite worthwhile. I suppose you can argue that closing a thread doesn't do anything because people can just start another, but that hasn't been my experience. It seems to cool things down quite well, by defusing an inflammatory situation without the disadvantages of deleting messages. People often do start another thread on the topic, but usually without the tone of animosity that the previous thread had. I didn't see much that was inspiring in the "Sir John" thread, but it basically was a personal attack, even if there was humor in it. Things had been a bit heated a couple weeks ago, so we're trying to keep a lid on things. Personal attacks, even done humorously, very often turn into an all-out nasty war. I think we've had enough of the nastiness for a good, long time. -Joe Offer- |
|
25 Jan 05 - 01:50 AM (#1387862) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=77622&messages=34 Yes you can still link to it and you can start another thread to talk about the same things (until some reason is found to close or delete this one also). So apart from perhaps making Joe feel special and important and being a rather futile exercise of power for the sake of power - there is really little point in closing or deleting entire threads - that Max has invited the public to contribute to - on this open discussion forum. If individual posts at thought to be so bad that we really need protecting against ourselves - perhaps any future action can be taken against just these posts - and not the entire thread? This is perhaps a fairer approach? Again Joe's confusion with the words 'we' and 'I' continues. Would it really be too much to ask if the comments from 'we' - always meaning action taken after joint agreement with others - made in editing text (so as not to refreash the thread) - were confined to this term? And comments such as the one above in normal text (which does refresh the thread) were confined to Joe's own views? |
|
25 Jan 05 - 03:01 AM (#1387883) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer No comment. -Joe Offer-
-Ian Tyson- |
|
25 Jan 05 - 05:58 AM (#1387947) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST Some Mudcatters insist on the right to attack others, while deprecating the attacks of others upon themselves. |
|
25 Jan 05 - 08:34 AM (#1387976) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Jim Dixon I don't see the point of closing a BS thread. People will just start another one. "...one big pile is better than two little piles..." --Arlo Guthrie |
|
25 Jan 05 - 09:03 AM (#1387989) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST And we have 27 8"x10" glossy photographs with circles and arrows to prove it! Giok |
|
25 Jan 05 - 09:17 AM (#1387995) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Tammy, tell me true .. and on a Saturday night CENSORING harmless, inoccuous, silly and funny weekend posts poking fun at Tammy and Gidget for ****s sake !!!!!!! relax maaaan.. chill out ..dont be so uptight. ..and what was all that twaddle relating the posts to Murdoch all about anyway.. you start taking autocratic decisions deleting posts and entire threads about such trivial subjects because you wont tolerate people enjoying being here and having daft fun together on a Saturday night.. QUOTE "I count 15 messages in this thread that had nothing to do with music. Most of those 15 came from two individuals, posted over a period of 30 minutes. That's not counting the messages I deleted in the other Gidget and Tammy threads. If you want to play cute, don't do it in the music threads. Better yet, don't do it at Mudcat. Thanks. -Joe Offer-" UNQUOTE thin end of the wedge.. well who knows where that will eventually lead.. ..maybe, DELETING legitimate threads asking serious questions about the nature of Thread Censorship at Mudcat.. |
|
25 Jan 05 - 11:29 AM (#1388081) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Once Famous Hi all! I have no problem with Lady John from Dull. He's OK considering his circumstances and his education. His spelling though, is not an act. |
|
25 Jan 05 - 12:42 PM (#1388173) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: John MacKenzie So many people on here are hiding behind something! |
|
25 Jan 05 - 01:18 PM (#1388215) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Refreshing Joe O. is still the best. I would not want his "job" on this forum. Sorry for any grey hairs we here might have caused you sir. |
|
25 Jan 05 - 01:30 PM (#1388234) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Hiding maybe this IS one thread were it is wiser to 'hide' behind guest names in order to concentrate attention on the issues.. so as not to get distracted by 'personalities' and all the negative baggage that is carried over with them from other threads.. and I would suggest the main issue here under debate is Mudcat censorship and accountability. |
|
25 Jan 05 - 02:56 PM (#1388311) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Peace I figure if ya got something to say, and you're not ashamed about it, use a name. When Joe banned me for a day, I deserved it. I hadn't posted to the music threads on purpose--but that's where I was fartin' around, and that is a big no-no, and I agree it should be a no-no. Joe's a really good guy, but I figure he's gotta feel the tensions maybe more than most. He's human, and a good one at that, but he is yet to have sainthood conferred on him. The Mudcat is a jewel on the internet, and over the past while I have made an attempt to clean up my act. Doin' OK so far. And the reason is that I do not want to contribute to the downfall of a tremendous place to go, talk, argue. Took me a while, but there IS a light at the end of them thar hills. Decisions are as easy to mix up as metaphors. Gotts give him and the clones credit though: they're right about 98.9756204% of the time. If I could do the math, I'd likely say the other whatever percent ain't so bad a guy can't live with it. Bruce Murdoch |
|
25 Jan 05 - 03:10 PM (#1388329) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Once Famous Oh, but brucie, they are ashamed big time. Most insulting threads come from nameless guests. It's easy common sense to see that many times it is way too easy for regulars to log out and do the dirtywork than to face someone in a regular identity. That's why insulting Guest posts are meaningless. |
|
26 Jan 05 - 03:01 AM (#1388797) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles maybe this IS one thread were it is wiser to 'hide' behind guest names in order to concentrate attention on the issues..so as not to get distracted by 'personalities' and all the negative baggage that is carried over with them from other threads.. and I would suggest the main issue here under debate is Mudcat censorship and accountability. Is it really the case now that it generally is thought to be wise to hide behind a guest name - in order to pass comment here? Or only safe to use one's own name to support these pointless deletions and displays of power? It is not a question of whether the censorship is right but whether it works and if the price paid for it on a discussion forum open for the public's contribution - is worth the loss of freedom of expression - which is the end result. For all this censorship and passing of judgement - obviously has not worked. The worse culprits of posting personal abuse are still contributing their abuse. There is little question of Joe's 'job' needing to be filled by anyone unwilling to take it on. There will be no lack of volunteers willing to pass their final judgement and take action on the worth of other's contributions. But there is no need to worry for their is little chance of Joe ever willingly giving up this apparent 'job for life' nor much chance of it being prized-away from him. |
|
26 Jan 05 - 03:54 AM (#1388820) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: s&r I love jOhn's posts - has he really been excommunicated? Stu |
|
26 Jan 05 - 04:52 AM (#1388841) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST No his voice was always pitched that high. |
|
27 Jan 05 - 08:47 AM (#1390126) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Wolfgang For all this censorship and passing of judgement - obviously has not worked. (Shambles) Rubbish, as John would say. You can opt for trying it the other way that's fine but you can't know let alone 'obviously' how it would be without interference. Let me translate your sentence into another context: All those speed limits in towns obviously have not worked for there are still people dying and there are violations on a daily basis. Wolfgang |
|
27 Jan 05 - 11:06 AM (#1390161) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles All those speed limits in towns obviously have not worked for there are still people dying and there are violations on a daily basis. We are not allowed to opt for it the other way - these judgements and actions are now being introduced and being imposed upon us and we are told we have no choice. You cannot equally claim that these methods do have any effect - if you do not ever test the alternative. Yet another way of avoiding the important issue for a bit of nit-picking. But OK speed limits plainly don't work as many of us see them as a personal challenge and try our best to get-away with ignoring them and speeding is a fact of life (or of driving). Folk do not ignore speed cameras but these are mainly for raising revenues (in the way of fines) rather than a serious measure to prevent speeding. The makers (and private operators) of these machines do not wish to see the end to speeding - as if it did end - they would all be out of a job. These are counter-productive in a similar way to all of Joe's rules. Some folk just see this as a red rag being waved to them and find all sorts of silly ways to see how far they can push things and Joe runs around chasing shadows, imposing yet more rules and looking silly and in the process, making a fine forum look equally silly. If Governments were serious about preventing speeding - the answers are fairly simple. You don't make vehicles that CAN exceed the limits Or you introduce gadgets like those speed limiters for Grand Prix pit lanes. If Joe and his volunteers were serious about personal abuse on this forum - they would not indulge in it or ignore some of the worst culprits (as they plainly do). And again if these methods ever suceeded in actually preventing personal abuse on the forum - there would be nothing for our protectors to do (except post like everyone else). So these unknown special few, have a vested interest in keeping it going and will introduce more and more rules to ensure that they can continue to pass judgement on the worth of other's contributions and feel very important, and worthy whilst doing so. |
|
27 Jan 05 - 12:47 PM (#1390264) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Mick Roger (Shambles), your whining about this stuff goes back so far and has been tiresome since 1999. This isn't a democracy, nor is it a governmental unit. It does not have an operations manual or a policies/procedure manual. It is an online forum. It has legs because it is inhabited by a variety of personalities, and by folks from all the strata that makes up the fascinating world we live in. Most of us, by our actions and posts, have assumed roles here. Yours has been the role of chronic whiner, as well as posting so you can be impressed with yourself. Apparently you get validation out of rambling on and on, and then getting the abuse that always comes. If your bitching had any validity, and if you had any gumption, you would do what Jon did and start your own website. You have not. Once in a while an issue comes up that occupies your time and you give us a break. I sure hope one comes up again soon, so we all get a break. This place is what it is. Live with it, grab yourself a Coke, go sit in the corner with a silly grin on your face, and enjoy yourself. But you won't. You will continue in the role that you have carved for yourself, that of chronic whining and bitching. I guess some good has come out of that, though. jOhn9 from Hull has made some of his funniest comments based on your actions. Mick |
|
27 Jan 05 - 01:52 PM (#1390329) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: John MacKenzie Sort of says it all really ;~) Giok |
|
28 Jan 05 - 03:30 AM (#1390993) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles Subject: RE: BS: The Shambles Whine About Mudcat Thread From: Big Mick - PM Date: 22 Jan 04 - 01:04 PM Folks, you may all do as you choose. It is my opinion that responding to Roger only feeds what he is after here. If you want to act in an "enabling" fashion, then by all means go on and continue the dialogue on the same old load of shite. If you are tired of this, then simply quit responding. Roger, please note that no one has shut down your thread, even though it is possible to do so. Please...........ramble on as long as you feel like doing so. I hope it is to an empty room. Mick A click on the following link http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=66176#1098834 will demonstrate that (despite the reference that it was possible to do so - but that no one had shut it down) you will not be able to contribute to it – as it was also closed. If it is really true – that expressing an honest and reasoned opinion on the forum will only result in abuse (from a few). And that this is somehow he fault of the person who posted that opinion – then it is a very sad end to a very fine attempt at an open public discussion forum. I don't accept that it is (yet) true and I will carry on contributing until it is finally true. In the hope that those who would wish to deny to other people - the freedom that they take as a right and those who support this and who plainly do not like Max's concept – go away and leave the rest of us in peace. To judge for ourselves what we choose to respond to – or ignore. |
|
28 Jan 05 - 05:40 AM (#1391060) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles I guess some good has come out of that, though. jOhn9 from Hull has made some of his funniest comments based on your actions. A past example of one of John's 'funniest' comments. Subject: RE: Please re-open thread? From: John from Hull Date: 18-Sep-04 - 11:07 PM Shambles, why don't you fuck off? Whilst folk like John are encouraged to think that - as long as they confine their personal abuse to certain easy targets - not only will this personal abuse be tolerated and thought to be amusing - it cannot be much of a surprise that the poor example set by those who would volunteer to judge the worth of our contributions - but who are exempt from any judgement themselves - will just be followed by others. There are examples of many more such 'witty' comments - if you wish to see these - and who were made made them? |
|
28 Jan 05 - 09:16 AM (#1391194) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: John MacKenzie My goodness you really know how to bear a grudge Shambles! Giok |
|
28 Jan 05 - 12:13 PM (#1391411) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Al Whittle as the late great Eddy waring once remarked, they're all pals in the showers..... |
|
28 Jan 05 - 12:41 PM (#1391441) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Once Famous Of course, it's Mudcat according to Big Mick................... Yawn. |
|
28 Jan 05 - 05:14 PM (#1391674) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Wolfgang You cannot equally claim that these methods do have any effect - if you do not ever test the alternative. (Shambles) You're right of course, but then I would not say that these methods 'obviously' have worked. Same as you cannot say that these methods 'obviously' have not worked. I'm glad to see you understand now what I found wrong in your argumentation. A click on the following link http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=66176#1098834 will demonstrate that (despite the reference that it was possible to do so - but that no one had shut it down) you will not be able to contribute to it – as it was also closed. (Shambles) Are you playing dumb for the sake of the effect, Shambles, or are you really uninformed about one aspect of your pet theme? You make it sound as if this was another go at censorship and as if Big Mick had posted something wrong then. Do you really not know that all BS threads are closed automatically (censorship!!!) after a couple of months (6?) completely independent of content? Once when I wanted to refresh an old thread after a long time I PMed Joe about it and a couple of hours later the thread was open for comment again. Maybe I did the wrong thing sending a PM merely asking for reopening. I rather should have started a new thread screaming 'censorship'. Wolfgang |
|
28 Jan 05 - 09:19 PM (#1391902) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles Wolfgang We may not agree but there is no need for us to be unpleasant. No I am not playing 'dumb' nor am I unable to speak. I am not consulted about these matters so my lack of knowledge can perhaps be understood. If you find that a thread is closed - and you may have already decided on posting a response before you get to the end and find that you can't - there is no way of knowing if the thread was closed because of some imposed time limit (and if so - is this type of thread closing really necessary)? Or because of some imposed judgement upon its worth. I rather suspect that this was the case here. It is plain that there is no shortage of such unhelpful judgements by our Chief Administrator and his volunteers. |
|
29 Jan 05 - 10:34 AM (#1392239) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles You make it sound as if this was another go at censorship and as if Big Mick had posted something wrong then. Do you not consider that all imposed closures of threads is NOT a form of censorship? What I said was perfectly factual. I simply quoted what was said and pointed out that despite this statement - the thread in question had in fact been shut down and that you would now be unable to contribute to it (unless you PMd our Chief Administrator and asked him nicely if he would be kind enough to re-open it for you). Whatever the various unspecified reasons that may have caused its eventual demise - the important fact is that this particular parrot is now dead. However, I suspect that in the view of many of us - the fact this and other threads are closed - could be viewed as a form of imposed censorship action - even if this action was set to be an automatic one. |
|
29 Jan 05 - 03:30 PM (#1392519) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles Do you not consider that all imposed closures of threads is NOT a form of censorship? Difficult to answer that one - I will try again. Do you consider that all imposed closures of threads are NOT a form of censorship? |
|
29 Jan 05 - 04:35 PM (#1392584) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Is thread closure a form of censorship? Oh, I suppose you could define it as censorship if you like. Still, it seems to be a worthwhile tool in certain circumstances. It helps people "switch gears" and turn the tone of a discussion into something more civil. It doesn't remove anything that has been said, but it does make it a bit inconvenient for people to continue a fight. If a thread is closed, people are free to start a new one. If a thread has been closed because of aggressive behavior or general nastiness, it's unlikely that we would be willing to reopen it. Sometimes, though, I'll let a topic cool down, and then quietly reopen it a few days later. There was mention above of "Joe's rules" at Mudcat. I think that more-or-less, they're a generally-accepted interpretation of how Mudcatters expect Mudcatters to behave. I'm just the one who wrote them down. Most of it is common sense, and I don't see anything particularly arbitrary or onerous about our conduct guidelines. You'll see them spelled out in this message in the FAQ. As you can see from the date at the bottom, they were last updated in November, 2003. We're constantly changing the way we deal with problems, but our general guidelines haven't changed much over the years. No, we don't delete every message, or close or delete every thread, that violates "the rules." We have better things to do with our time than that, and closing and deleting aren't the only ways to deal with problems. This doesn't mean that we "tolerate" aggressive or abusive behavior - that's just not the case. Still, it would be nice if people would adhere to to our guidelines without any control at all, and just be civil toward one another. -Joe Offer- |
|
29 Jan 05 - 06:06 PM (#1392652) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles ubject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 11-Jun-04 - 12:01 AM Max, Jeff, and Joe were off doing other things today, and missed this one. It's a personal attack, and it isn't allowed. Since so many have posted to it, I guess I won't delete it - but I will close it. This is one of the "no-brainers" that the Clones should have deleted early on, no matter what Shambles thinks. Clones, don't let Shambles care you off - you're doing a good job, but you should have deleted this and told us about it. Bob, I'm sorry this happened. Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something. -Joe Offer- Subject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 11-Jun-04 - 12:29 AM I could delete Bob's name, but I doubt that would do any good. the damage has been done. The thread should have been deleted as soon as it appeared, and I'm sorry that didn't happen. But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit. -Joe Offer- Subject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 12-Jun-04 - 03:23 AM Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying. -Joe Offer- |
|
29 Jan 05 - 06:20 PM (#1392662) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Yes, Shambles, we do want to keep you happy.... I have held my tongue since last June, and haven't made any comment about you at all. Do you find that frustrating??? love, -Joe Offer- |
|
29 Jan 05 - 07:08 PM (#1392715) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles Still, it would be nice if people would adhere to to our guidelines without any control at all, and just be civil toward one another. -Joe Offer- Like many other posters here - I do not ever make abusive personal attacks on anyone or ever respond to obvious provocation. There is simply never any need nor any point in this. Your attacks upon me are simply because I hold and express a different view to you. It is not pleasant being judged and having somone impose this judgement upon you (in the name of maintaining civility). There is little that is civil in this imposition and I feel that it should not be done lightly - if it should be done at all here. Your personal attacks upon me were because you thought I was judging you unfairly and quite understandably - you did not like it much as you thought you did not deserve this judgement. Even though (unlike you) I could not take any editing action based on this judgement. That is the way that many of the subjects of your judgement feel. The best way to ensure that posters behave respectfully (if this is really the only object of all this censorship) - is to always set a good example and to always show those who Max has invited to contribute to our forum some respect. If you you feel you are qualified to judge their worth and feel you should control them and not look foolish - you probably always have to be above judgement yourself. And never feel you have the right to make abusive attacks at anyone or encourage others to - no matter how frustrated you may become with them. I really don't mind you loosing your tongue and making abusive personal attacks on me (I would prefer some sensible debate with you and others on this issue). It really is very easy to ignore this from you or anyone else. It is you and your anonymous volunteers seemingly ever-ready fingers on the edit buttom that concern me more than your tongue. |
|
29 Jan 05 - 11:47 PM (#1392925) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Well, gee, Shambles. I thought I was just disagreeing - not making abusive attacks. And even what I said last June that you quoted above - expressing exasperation with your constant whining is not what most normal people would consider to be an abusive attack. So, I guess the best thing I can do is to continue to ignore you, since it appears I will continue to be in my current position and do my work the best I can, and you will continue to complain about that. Sounds like a stalemate, doesn't it? -Joe Offer- |
|
30 Jan 05 - 06:10 AM (#1393030) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: van lingle Sounds like the continuation of a beautiful friendship. Thanks for all your efforts around here Joe.vl |
|
30 Jan 05 - 06:15 AM (#1393033) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles I have no interest any contest with you or anyone else. I am sad to see that you do appear to see it in terms of some game but more importantly to use it as an excuse to avoid further debate on a subject that is of concern to many. Using your game concept - your refusal ever to move even a little in response to these concerns - is not stalemate but something worse. As you are fully aware my reference to you making abusive attacks were to the past ones quoted. And to the others from you, that I have not quoted. As to whether these qualify as what normal people would judge as an abusive - depends on what you consider to be normal. Inciting others to 'smear my reputation' - suggesting that 'we' start 'theads about me and sheep or something' - if made by some other poster may just result in an excuse to close or delete an entire thread. The mess that usually results from one poster making such abusive attacks and incitement - was probably only avoided by my refusal to ever respond to you (orthers) in kind. Given this encourgement (and double standard) it is not really too surprising that John's 'witty' F*** Off Shambles posts - are also not thought by you to be abusive personal attacks. But however you judge the level of it - this sort of thing is just not necessary from you or anyone - especially when the whole justification for all this imposed (but selective) censorship conducted by you and your anonymous volunteers - is supposed to be to protect us from such things. It is a matter of judgement. Most of us don't mind judging others but do not like to be judged ourselves. As to whether your past comments to me qualify as abusive personal attacks - I will leave to others to judge. |
|
30 Jan 05 - 11:55 AM (#1393303) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Mick There you go, Roger. Get the last word. I know you get your validation in this, so have at it. Mick |
|
30 Jan 05 - 06:07 PM (#1393656) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles One thing is sure. Whether Joe's personal attacks upon me – are justified by him as acceptable 'cute personal attacks' or considered by other (apparently abnormal) people to be not-so-cute personal attacks' – no one will be deleting such comments posted by Joe. http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=77622&messages=34 The above thread was close with the following (brown) editorial comment. And yeah, of course the thread has to be closed. The basic premise of the thread is personal attack. I don't care who's right or who's wrong - we just need to have them stop, and that means taking action against all combatants. I don't want to bother sorting out cute personal attacks from not-so-cute personal attacks. Personal attacks have been a problem here at Mudcat for a long, long time. Sometimes it seems like a losing battle. -Joe Offer- Perhaps as it is a losing battle and Joe does not want to 'bother' - Joe is going to stop? I really question if this was a battle that was ever seriously joined. For all this imposed judgement and the closing and deleting of entire threads – after the event – does nothing at all to prevent abusive personal attacks from being made in the first place. All this probably just makes it worse and the double standards like those demonstrated here - from those who would feel qualified to judge us – do not help. It may not be as much fun or make folk feel as important as imposing judgement upon others – but the only way to stop all this abusive silliness – is simply for all of us to set the right example. That is - never to respond (especially in kind) to obvious provocation or even acknowledge it. Or encourage in any way any response that may be given by others. If we ALL do this – and it really is not very difficult - there will be no excuse for anyone to impose their judgement upon us. And all of our volunteers - can then go away and leave the rest of us to post again - in peace. |
|
01 Feb 05 - 10:52 AM (#1395654) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Wolfgang Do you consider that all imposed closures of threads are NOT a form of censorship? (Shambles) Yes, I do, after some reading whether the word in English means what it means in German. The differences to all definitions of censorship I have consulted with automatic closure are: (1) Nothing is deleted at all and the posts can be read by everyone (2) The closure is completely independent of content Well, Shambles, I tended to think that you had more knowledge on a field you post about such a lot, that's why I thought you might deliberately 'play dumb' for the sake of the argument. I accept that I was wrong about that: you have not been playing dumb. Wolfgang |
|
01 Feb 05 - 10:58 AM (#1395659) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Mick Ouch!! |
|
01 Feb 05 - 11:04 AM (#1395666) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Bill D oh, my! *grin* |
|
01 Feb 05 - 12:15 PM (#1395759) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles Perhaps if you were as nit-picking towards the defence given for all of the measures and actions taken against posters here that you support - as you are with any attempts to make them clear and consistent in purpose - we may all be better off? But at least you at least are making some attempt at sensible debate. (1) Nothing is deleted at all and the posts can be read by everyone They can be read but the closure still prevents any furher contribution. (2) The closure is completely independent of content The day when machines do as they wish and not where and when as we instruct them - this may be true. |
|
01 Feb 05 - 12:46 PM (#1395795) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles Is thread closure a form of censorship? Oh, I suppose you could define it as censorship if you like. Still, it seems to be a worthwhile tool in certain circumstances. It helps people "switch gears" and turn the tone of a discussion into something more civil. All the imposed closure (automatic or otherwise) of an entire thread does is prevent any further contributions to it. And it prevents any later - more positive contributions from altering its course and denies the opportunity for any posititive contibutors to make the attempt. Wolfgang - you disagreeing with our volunteers on this matter is at least a good start. Do you also agree that the examples I have placed here - of their abusive personal attacks upon me - and attempts to incite others to do this are also not acceptable? |
|
01 Feb 05 - 01:17 PM (#1395818) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: John MacKenzie You'd think his poor little fingers would get tired wouldn't you! Giok |
|
01 Feb 05 - 02:24 PM (#1395896) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Wolfgang Shambles, the first part of my last post has only argued why the designation 'censorship' in my eyes is wrong and was BTW in response to a question you have asked. Nothing you have said to that was in any way related to my point. I do not understand why you address me in your post form 01 Feb 05 - 12:46 PM . Where have you read my disagreement with the volunteers regarding their activity in general? That does not mean I need to agree with each single expression used by them. But I think you should admit, Roger, that you have really worked hard for these expression to come. Wolfgang |
|
01 Feb 05 - 03:13 PM (#1395950) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles Our volunteers appear to accept that thread closure could be defined as a form of censorship - you appear not agree to agree. That is a start - even if we are only talking semantics and you carefully avoid answering or addressing other points. Such as the following. Would you accept that those who would volunteer to judge us - and as a result do have a priviliged position and that with this position comes a responsiblity to always set the very best of examples? And as demonstrated here - that when these volunteers do mount personal abusive attacks upon other posters (whatever they feel the provocation to be) and incite others to do this - and publicly defend or excuse this action - it is not ever acceptable and that we are sadly seeing the results of others following this example of the double standard? |
|
01 Feb 05 - 07:03 PM (#1396229) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Shambles, when we give an answer to your question, why not respond to the answer, rather than restating the original question and acting as though we had never given you an answer? Why don't you write one message with a systematic description of what you want, and what you're complaining about - When you've finished that, go find the answers we've given already, and post them alongside your questions. It's really difficult to communicate with you because you keep repeating yourself, going around in circles, and ignoring our answers. Therefore, the temptation is either to ignore you or to scorn you. I think I've answered almost every one of your questions, time and time again. Mick and Jeri and some of the other volunteers have also given you answers. Many of our answers have not been to your liking, but we have always given honest answers. We have no reason to be dishonest. While most of your arguments have validity, they are usually simply a matter of choice. When we have chosen an alternative path, you continue to argue, as if yours were the only way. It's hard to argue back because you're right - but so are we. For example, I have chosen to make editorial comments in brown, indented, directly under the message asking me a question. You don't like that practice, and you've stated that time and time again. Your reasons for not liking it are valid - but this is just a matter of choice and judgment, not right and wrong. You speak as though every editorial act here is a grievous wrong, and that's just not the case. It's simply a matter of choice and judgment, done to achieve a goal of comfort and civility. Same for identifying the individual editorial acts done by volunteers. Sure, we could do that - but we don't want to, and we have good reason not to. We edit sparingly and only when we feel we have to - to remove a hurtful or damaging statement or to stop a battle. Publicizing our actions and opening each to discussion would serve to call attention to the very problems we are attempting to deal with quietly, and it would serve to feed our trolls' craving for attention - that's just what we have to do. Our editing is like a game of poker - if we have to show our hand, we lose. As for thread closure, sure it could be called censorship - or not. whatever the case, its effect is the mere inconvenience of having to post a continued discussion in another thread - and yet it seems to work to cool things down. It allows serious participants to continue their discussion, while making it inconvenient for the troublemakers to steal the stage. It has been years since you were able to ask a new question, and I'm really getting tired of having to come up with the same questions to the same answers. You seem to have a file of all of my statements, anyhow, as indicated in the Gallery of Mudcat Quotations and in so many other threads. I'm tired of being held to answer for things I answered long ago. Besides, it's really kind of spooky to think that somebody is keeping a record of every statement I make. -Joe Offer- |
|
01 Feb 05 - 07:31 PM (#1396263) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Villa Joe This is someone called "Shambles" - a clue in there somewhere? |
|
01 Feb 05 - 07:55 PM (#1396291) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer Well, I found that many towns in England have a section called "The Shambles," and it's always the most interesting part of town - kind of like Diagon Alley in the Harry Potter movies. I think that our Shambles is a very interesting character, himself. -Joe Offer- |
|
01 Feb 05 - 08:48 PM (#1396353) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Mick Quite frankly, Roger, it is fortunate for you that someone as level headed as Joe, Jeff, and Max are, is making the decisions. If it were my decision, I would block you. Here is why. First off, you have nothing constructive to say. The majority of your posts, by a large margin, are on a single subject. That subject is your dissatisfaction with this place. With very few exceptions (the Pianist thread) that is all you post about. Second, It is clear that you gain some kind of gratification from complaining, and the resultant nasty responses from folks. It is like a Quixote complex gone mad. It seems counter productive to keep feeding this. I know that M, J & J are correct in their response to you. But a number of us feel that the forum would be better served without you in it. I wish that were not so. In fact I remember a time when you contributed mightily to this place. I wish that were still the case. In short, you are the best case that can be made for a moderated forum. Fortunately there is only one of you. I am posting this because of your focus on Joe. Joe has actually been one of your saving graces. There are a number of us that are pretty much at the end of our rope. You don't recognize that we understand Max's desire to keep this place as it is, hence you are allowed to continue. Instead of complaining about them, you should be grateful. Mick the Mudelf |
|
02 Feb 05 - 05:57 AM (#1396683) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,The Shambles It's really difficult to communicate with you because you keep repeating yourself, going around in circles, and ignoring our answers. Therefore, the temptation is either to ignore you or to scorn you. When you do respond to my questions and not personally attack me and incite others to do so–simply for holding and expressing a different view - then post not to apologise - but to excuse these actions - these answers simply tend to create even more questions. Resisting temptation is what responsibility is about. If you can't set this example – then perhaps you are not qualified to judge others? But this is what a discussion is. I simply see this as a discussion among equals on what is a discussion forum. Like many others I like this forum. Perhaps those that do appear to like the fact that Max has opened this forum for contributions from, all of the public – should stop complaining and find another site? One where they can pass judgement on whoever they wish? I think I've answered almost every one of your questions, time and time again. Mick and Jeri and some of the other volunteers have also given you answers. Many of our answers have not been to your liking, but we have always given honest answers. We have no reason to be dishonest. While most of your arguments have validity, they are usually simply a matter of choice. When we have chosen an alternative path, you continue to argue, as if yours were the only way. It's hard to argue back because you're right - but so are we. Then why argue, threaten and storm-off, rather than continue to use reason and logic in a ongoing discussion? For example, I have chosen to make editorial comments in brown, indented, directly under the message asking me a question. You don't like that practice, and you've stated that time and time again. Your reasons for not liking it are valid - but this is just a matter of choice and judgment, not right and wrong. You speak as though every editorial act here is a grievous wrong, and that's just not the case. It's simply a matter of choice and judgment, done to achieve a goal of. The choice to respond to a question posed in a thread – and NOT refresh the thread – is not a choice or judgement that is open to us all. This last example that you claimed to be an editorial comment – was in fact nothing of the sort and could and should have been posted in the conventional way - that everyone else is limited to. My reasonable request has simply been that a consistent approach is kept in the use of this – so this is not thought, as our volunteers doing just as the fancy takes them, and abusing their trusted position. Whatever opinions and wishes may be expressed (and not just by me) - it is a sad fact that every one of these discussions ends with you stating (in one way or another) that you and your volunteers are going to carry-on doing exactly what you want to. No matter how poor the logic or justification for it and the message being given out by this. There is nothing comfortable or civil about volunteering to deny to others – against their will - the freedoms that you take as a right. As for your so-called but undefined, 'troublemakers' – I and I suspect many others can and are dealing with them ourselves – by ignoring and never responding to them. Something you and your volunteers seem to find impossible to do or set a responsible example in. Surely our volunteers being seen to set this example will do more good and be less counter-productive - than all of this judgement and reactive imposed censorship taken against their fellow posters? I'm tired of being held to answer for things I answered long ago. Besides, it's really kind of spooky to think that somebody is keeping a record of every statement I make. There is nothing 'spooky' in the fact that everything you post here (except of course the posts and entire threads that volunteers decide to delete) can be retrieved in a simple search, to come back and haunt you. This is just another reality of the forum – it does not allow us to re-write history. If you don't like these realities and are now tired of the responsibility you have volunteered for – perhaps you and your volunteers can give-up judging us and find some place where the realities are more to your liking or where you can shape them to this? I use the term censorship and the term volunteer as these are the polite ones. What is currently being allowed to happen on our forum can be called many other less polite things. All I would request is that IF these measures are thought to be required and effective – that they be open, fair and consistent. And all those who feel qualified to judge, criticise and impose action based on that judgement are known and are always accountable to their fellow posters. And if they fail to set a good example – that they will face official actions similar to that which faces other posters who are thought to transgress. I really care little about other's and Joe's abusive personal attacks upon me, for these can always be ignored. However, his incitement for others to do this and his excusing of it – from the privileged position of feeling qualified to impose judgement on others for the same offence – is a serious abuse of this position. It makes the whole forum look oppressive and it is not acceptable - if the whole point of all this imposed judgement is undertaken in the name of "comfort and civility". |
|
02 Feb 05 - 09:39 AM (#1396747) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ |
|
02 Feb 05 - 10:02 AM (#1396757) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: GUEST,Schoolmaster Will you children just be quiet. You've let us down, you've let mudcat down and most of all you've let yourselves down. |
|
02 Feb 05 - 05:15 PM (#1397099) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Joe Offer You're right, Schoolmaster. It's just that it's too damn easy to get sucked into the vortex of these circular arguments. The Shambles discussion hasn't changed since 1999. It just goes round and round and round and round. We keep hoping for a breakthrough and understanding, but it never comes. -Joe Offer- |
|
02 Feb 05 - 05:29 PM (#1397120) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Once Famous Hey, at least you're not talking about me for a change. Far out. hang in there Shambles. I really don't want all of the attention. |
|
03 Feb 05 - 03:26 AM (#1397559) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles The grounds for blocking me would be what exactly - that some of 'us' think it better that I were not allowed to post anymore - because 'we' don't think that I have anything 'constuctive' to say? If I am accused of being paranoid - this sort of post may possibly be why? A post that ignores the issue and is a judgement only upon the worth of individuals invited to post here by Max - based only on (some of) what may have been seen of their posting done under their own name - my case since 1998. It is probably made worse that some of those included and spoken for in this post as 'we' - do not choose to even use their own names when using this same judgement whilst imposing their censorship actions upon others (who may). Is all this then really thought to be 'constructive? Could these unknown group of judges - in fact be the real 'troublemakers'? While all this censorhip and judgement continues so do the abusive personal attacks. Not surprising as some of these personal attacks are mounted and defended by our volunteers. Many posters seeing this - honestly question IF any censorship is actually taking place to prevent it for many of the culprits - known to be the worst offenders over many years are still posting away (without any threats). These posters are obviously thought to be 'constructive' and do not get the public animosity from our volunteers that seem reserved for anyone who seriously questions the wisdom of some of actions of our volunteers and suggests ways this could be improved. Mainly by a better example being given by our volunteers.... |
|
03 Feb 05 - 12:54 PM (#1398072) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Big Mick Want to know why we think you act paranoid? The operative point in my post was that you haven't been blocked due to the wishes of the folks that started the place. Kind of blows your theory to hell, eh? And what was your response? To post saying the same thing you have been whining about since 1999. I rest my case. Mick |
|
03 Feb 05 - 01:54 PM (#1398149) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: The Shambles Want to know why we think you act paranoid? No - I don't wish to know who you refer to as 'we' either. *Smiles* The operative point in my post was that you haven't been blocked due to the wishes of the folks that started the place. Kind of blows your theory to hell, eh? I rather think we all knew this - as it was pretty obvious that my posts have not been blocked by more sensible people like Max - so there was very little point in your posting at all. I do have a morbid curiosity in knowing what theory of mine you think it was that was blown to hell - but I can probably live without knowing. It would be nice to have all of us that profess to like the forum - to work together and set a better example than to indulge in these type of personal exchanges in public and provide so much for the forum's detractors to enjoy. For I am only too happy to support any clear, consistent measures - but please don't expect me to support this present free-for-all. Where every imposed censorship action is justified and defended by the usual 'spin'- no mattter what it may have been, no matter how much harm it causes and no matter who questions it or their suggested alternatives. |
|
03 Feb 05 - 01:59 PM (#1398156) Subject: RE: BS: Can't Refresh A Closed Thread : RE jOhn From: Oaklet 100! |