|
22 Mar 06 - 07:33 AM (#1700040) Subject: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: catspaw49 Since these copycat threads seem to be all the rage currently on Mudcat and I have never before started one, this looked like a good place! If you think this sucks or does not suck, please say so here. I'll start by saying I think they all suck, but I figure that even this shall pass away so wtf? As for the thread which spawned (or spawed) this one, almost everything in the BS section involves some type of value judgement. If you read Roger's entire first posting, IT is a value judgement and therefore shoots the week straight to hell from the gitgo. The gitgo is is three blocks down on the left. Spaw |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:36 AM (#1700042) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Ron Davies Is the gas cheaper at the gitgo than at the Citgo? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:40 AM (#1700045) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: jacqui.c I think that's wonderful 'Spaw! |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:42 AM (#1700047) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: wysiwyg Bush oughtta close Gitgo; we all know it's full of abuse. ~S~ |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:50 AM (#1700054) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie I wish I could think of some way to make the git go! G. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:51 AM (#1700056) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: jacqui.c Nice one Giok! |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:59 AM (#1700066) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: catspaw49 And a really fine value judgement there Jacqui.......Of course that is just MY value judgement, but it is great to have the freedom to make it here!!! Spaw (snickering away) |
|
22 Mar 06 - 07:59 AM (#1700067) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles I could post only a personal judgement here of this thread's originator. But I won't. For why should anyone who does not know me really care to read what my public judgement may be of someone who I have never met? Or why should anyone care to read how many different abusive names I can call them to fill up our forum and encourage others to try and follow this amusing example? So I will choose not to subject the rest of our forum to this sort of personal judgement. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 08:01 AM (#1700070) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: catspaw49 In whatever case, it was good of you to come here and post that judgement Roger. Spaw (snickering some more) |
|
22 Mar 06 - 08:01 AM (#1700071) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: jacqui.c Thank you 'Spaw. I try so hard to be good at all I do. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:05 AM (#1700125) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Subject: RE: BS: anyone seen my vagina thread ? From: Big Mick - PM Date: 21 Mar 06 - 09:28 PM Most of the copycat threads, IMO, are inane and a waste of bandwidth. Joe shows a lot more restraint than I would. Mick |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:24 AM (#1700151) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Subject: BS: Copy Cat threads....?? From: Sorcha - PM Date: 19 Mar 06 - 08:06 PM Anybody else sick of them? I know I am....rubbish. Shove off, mates. At least get an original idea once in a while, OK? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:25 AM (#1700152) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D "...and after this, the judgement" wow, them judgement things are purty scary. I wonder if we offend Shambles, we all go to Hull? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:27 AM (#1700154) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Subject: RE: BS: Copy Cat threads....?? From: Wolfgang - PM Date: 20 Mar 06 - 08:04 AM I'd prefer the people who think they are so original when they find a new meaning to a thread title with a change of a few letters to do this within the thread they copy. To start a thread just for one more or less funny title line is like telling a joke so loud that everybody in a pub just has to listen. Mostly, the people who read the original thread might be mildly amused, but those who don't read the original thread are annoyed. Wolfgang |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:27 AM (#1700155) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Little Hawk Just interpret it all subjectively as you go through the available evidence. Sift it into what you consider reasonable and what you don't. The conclusions you will come to will support your established view of the matter. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 09:54 AM (#1700185) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Subject: RE: BS: Copy Cat threads....?? From: Jerry Rasmussen - PM Date: 19 Mar 06 - 09:44 PM I'm with you, Sorcha. Let's see how many copy cat threads there are that are started in response to this one... Whyncha come on in my kitchen and try sitting at the kitchen table for a spell? Jerry |
|
22 Mar 06 - 10:00 AM (#1700192) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Jerry Rasmussen Dang! We iz a bunch a reprehensible folks. I must admit, I have said things that were judgmental, but then so have we all, including the white as driven snow Shambles. But then, there are times when you gotta say wot you gotta say. If you try to submerge all criticism and judgment you may end up flipping out and shooting a gas station attendant. (That last sentence is suitable for cut and pasting.) Howzabout a week with no cutting and pasting? Now there's an idea for ya. Guilty as charged.. Jerry |
|
22 Mar 06 - 10:03 AM (#1700193) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: katlaughing Somebody put that parrot back in his cage and throw a towel over it! |
|
22 Mar 06 - 10:09 AM (#1700196) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie Roger I really think you should re read your own post of 07:59, and ask yourself similar questions. Something along the lines of, who is he, and what right does he have to tell us what to do? Giok |
|
22 Mar 06 - 10:14 AM (#1700201) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Peace "If you think this sucks or does not suck, please say so here." Let me know if you get shit fer it. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 11:37 AM (#1700274) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: number 6 "spelling mistaks suck" sIx |
|
22 Mar 06 - 11:50 AM (#1700290) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D "I wish I liked the human race, I wish I liked its silly face. I wish I liked the way it walks. I wish I liked the way it talks. And when I'm introduced to one, I wish I thought "What jolly fun" |
|
22 Mar 06 - 12:43 PM (#1700338) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: jeffp I find it funny that Roger claims that he will refrain from posting his personal judgment of this thread. He then goes on to post quotes from several other people offering their judgments of similar threads (but not this one). In doing so, he is of course expressing his judgment of this thread, but in a thoroughly dishonest manner. Spaw, in my ever-so-humble judgment, this is far and away the best of the copycat threads. Jeff |
|
22 Mar 06 - 12:58 PM (#1700352) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: catspaw49 No sense in being humble over a GREAT judgement like that Jeff!!!! THREE CHEERS FOR JEFFY!!!!!Spaw |
|
22 Mar 06 - 01:08 PM (#1700363) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: jeffp Thank you all. I'd like to thank the academy, my parents, my wife, everyone I ever met, those I haven't met yet......what do you mean my time is up? I have more to say! Oh bugger! |
|
22 Mar 06 - 01:10 PM (#1700365) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: GUEST I've always wondered how the underworld got the name of a Viking goddess? (Hell) |
|
22 Mar 06 - 01:14 PM (#1700367) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie Do you need another Kleenex jeffp? G.☺ |
|
22 Mar 06 - 01:32 PM (#1700385) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Jodie Foster may continue to outwardly ignore me for the rest of my life, but I have made her one of the most famous actresses in the world. John W. Hinckley, Jr. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:02 PM (#1700403) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam Roger. G.☻ |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:16 PM (#1700416) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D Querulous queer quotidian quotes quite quickly quiet quirky quibbles. Rogét, in his cups |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:40 PM (#1700426) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Peace Huh? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:43 PM (#1700428) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie You're only a school teacher Bruce, you wouldn't understand. G.☺ |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:43 PM (#1700430) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Azizi Bill, as I'm sure you are aware, the word "queer" has been used as to negatively refer to homosexuals. I don't know anything about Shambles beyond his posting on this forum. And I certainly don't know or care to know anything about his sexual identity. But I take exception to you calling him or anyone else "queer". Maybe you didn't mean it in that way, but that's the way I took it. Some of my best friends and some of my family members are homosexuals. And yes, I'm aware that in an attempt to rid the word "queer" of its negative connotations, some individuals who are homosexuals use it as a descriptor for themselves and their gay friends. But still, I had to say that if I had my druthers, I'd prefer it not be used on Mudcat. I'd hate to see Mudcat become a forum where homophobic language becomes acceptable. Again, Bill, you may not have meant it this way, and Roger may be the most heterosexual man on the globe, but I just felt the need to write this. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:49 PM (#1700435) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Peace "If you try to submerge all criticism and judgment you may end up flipping out and shooting a gas station attendant." But how would you get him in the syringe (let alone through the needle)? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 02:53 PM (#1700440) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Ebbie I think it's valid to note the usage of such a word- but the usage itself is perfectly proper. (Especially in the way that Bill used it in his couplet. Is it a couplet if it's only one line?) Using it as a truism made up of all Q's is used quite rightly. Queer, meaning strange, is an old term. As is 'gay'. Gay is a happy little word and when it is appropriate, I will continue to use it to mean joyful. Gay and Queer currently have more specialized meanings, and I have no problem with that. Like you, Azizi, I have gay friends and I like the absence of any connotation in that word that because they are "different", they are somehow inferior. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 03:07 PM (#1700447) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D *sigh*...well, I am personally sad that words like 'gay' and 'queer' have gained that sort of status. They are perfectly good words, and need to read in context. And, in context, I did not 'call' anyone anything...'queer' modifies 'quotes', and merely means 'strange' and 'unusual'. I did not even consider the sexual connotation of that word when I concocted that silly post! I DO appreciate the need to be careful how one's posts appear, and I try hard to avoid misunderstandings. I have no intent to malign or offend any group. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 03:20 PM (#1700452) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Alba Well I use the word 'queer'. It is a word which is still used, as far as I am aware, in Scotland and Ireland frequently. For example: "That's a queer looking Car, what make it is?" or "I feel queer", meaning I feel odd, sick. It may be a term that is used in a negative context when used with regards to the Homosexual Community but like the word 'gay', queer also has various meanings. To stop saying the words I was raised with in my vocabulary in the correct context is, in my opinion, taking PC to far. I also think that by using these words as they were intended takes the power away from those who would use them as a term of insult. Taking back the language stolen by those who would seek to twist it's meanings is also an effective way of stripping the negative context attached to certain words I think. I got yer meaning Bill:) Jude |
|
22 Mar 06 - 03:24 PM (#1700457) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Alba ooops I meant to add, sorry for the Thread drift Spaw. J |
|
22 Mar 06 - 03:27 PM (#1700463) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Joe Offer Azizi, I think it's very important for us to avoid being overly sensitive about the use of words, and to avoid reading prejudice into places where there is none. Here on a folk music forum, we frequently discuss songs and use traditional language that now can be considered objectionable in certain circumstances. I think it's very important for us not to get huffy about how people use language. I think that the "modern" attempt to sanitize language of everything objectionable, is highly offensive. That sort of judgmentalism is divisive. Most people find nothing wrong with the use of "queer" and "gay" in appropriate context. -Joe Offer- |
|
22 Mar 06 - 04:10 PM (#1700486) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: GUEST BTW...I needed MobySaurus to get a couple of those words 'right'.... (Not that the whole thing smacks of profound wisdom or anything...but it sure was fun, and 'almost' makes sense!) |
|
22 Mar 06 - 04:11 PM (#1700487) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: GUEST,Bill D *tsk*...lost my cookie...that was me |
|
22 Mar 06 - 04:25 PM (#1700493) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bee-dubya-ell LUCY SADLER'S HOGS HEAD CHEESE RECIPE 6 fresh pigs feet 6 lbs. pork neck bones 2 lg. onions, chopped 1/2 head garlic, chopped Sm. amount of green onion tops (a pinch will do) A pinch of parsley Boil meat until tender and remove all bones. Cook onions and garlic in 1 cup water until tender. Mix this into meat and add green onion tops and parsley. Cook about 5 minutes until water is boiled down. Pour into bowls and allow to jell. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 04:37 PM (#1700506) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Azizi Joe Offer and others, I do not feel that I could not be true to my self if I had not publicly posted my objection to the word "queer" as it has come to be used as a negative code word for homosexuals. For the record, I PMed Bill after I posted my comment in this thread. Not that it matters in the scheme of things, I also want to say that I accept his public and private statement as posted here. As far as I am concerned, enough said. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 04:42 PM (#1700509) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Azizi Oh no...Where is my grammar book when I need it? I think I have too many negative in my first sentence of my last post. What I meant to say is that in order to be true tomyself, I had to write that post objecting to the use of the word queer because that word has become a coded negative reference for homosexuals. That sentence is only slightly better. ..I don't want to try again. Hopefully, my meaning is clearer. Sorry for the thread drift. I meant no offense, and it is clear to me now that neither did Bill D. |
|
22 Mar 06 - 05:17 PM (#1700538) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D "Everyone's crazy but me and Thee, and sometimes I think Thou art a little queer." old Quaker (Friends) Life gets teejus, don't it? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 05:54 PM (#1700556) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Peace "Life gets teejus, don't it? I have to ask, Bill: Have you found Teejus? |
|
22 Mar 06 - 06:04 PM (#1700564) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D LOL...Teejus is looking for ME! |
|
22 Mar 06 - 06:08 PM (#1700567) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Peace LOL |
|
22 Mar 06 - 06:17 PM (#1700572) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Amos For the ultimate in Non-Judgemental Views, here's JEsuson various political topics: http://www.wiseass.org/html/content-jesus.html. A |
|
23 Mar 06 - 02:22 AM (#1700705) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Someday we may have as many followers as the harpsichord. Eddie Condon |
|
23 Mar 06 - 03:43 AM (#1700723) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Rule 1: Remember the human. http://www.albion.com/netiquette/rule1.html It's ironic, really. Computer networks bring people together who'd otherwise never meet. But the impersonality of the medium changes that meeting to something less -- well, less personal. Humans exchanging email often behave the way some people behind the wheel of a car do: They curse at other drivers, make obscene gestures, and generally behave like savages. Most of them would never act that way at work or at home. But the interposition of the machine seems to make it acceptable. The message of Netiquette is that it's not acceptable. Yes, use your network connections to express yourself freely, explore strange new worlds, and boldly go where you've never gone before. But remember the Prime Directive of Netiquette: Those are real people out there. |
|
23 Mar 06 - 05:47 AM (#1700785) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Wolfgang During National Brotherhood Week various special events are arranged to drive home the message of brotherhood - this year, for example, on the first day of the week, Malcolm X was killed,* which gives you an idea of how effective the whole thing is. I'm sure we all agree that we ought to love one another, and I know there are people in the world who do not love their fellow human beings, and I hate people like that! (Tom Lehrer) Wolfgang |
|
23 Mar 06 - 06:43 AM (#1700828) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles I may disagree with what you say- |
|
23 Mar 06 - 08:12 AM (#1700918) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: Bill D for many quotations & opinions and 'interesting' discussions (right column and bottom) |
|
24 Mar 06 - 11:02 AM (#1701794) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: The Shambles Common sense is not so common. Voltaire |
|
24 Mar 06 - 11:09 AM (#1701801) Subject: RE: BS: Non-Non-posting of judgements week From: John MacKenzie "As it enters the ear, does it come in like broken glass or does it come in like honey? Eddie Condon |