|
24 Oct 06 - 08:49 AM (#1867138) Subject: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Please do something to control Shambles' constant babbling. It sure would be appreciated by a lot of people. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:08 AM (#1867147) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST why am I reminded of........ |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:10 AM (#1867150) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: nutty I'm sure that Max would appreciate a name 'Guest', as well as specifics. Membership costs nothing and would allow you to send Max a PM regarding your problems. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:17 AM (#1867166) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Max Our priority number 2 is to beef up the back end security of the site so that we can confront such issues. I cannot currently effectively enforce a ban on the savy. It would be too easy for them to find a workaround and get back in, now angry. Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:19 AM (#1867169) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: wysiwyg Thanks for your prompt reply, Max. ~Susan |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:36 AM (#1867196) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Hi Nutty, I really didn't want to use my name for this one. No need to become too popular or unpopular. Obviously, Max knows the specifics about this (see above). |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:37 AM (#1867197) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Thanks Max. Ican't wait for it to happen. His threads just go on and on and on. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:21 AM (#1867240) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Richard Bridge This is unnecessary. If you don't like them, don't read them, and don't post to them. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:25 AM (#1867242) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: dwditty Amen |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:29 AM (#1867248) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Fooles Troupe Yea Verily! |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:32 AM (#1867253) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,bemused Dear max could you please do something about the asshole members who can't control themselves. They have to open certain posts just to bitch. Very sad. Any takers on the opening posters identity? Ummmm I'll put a fiver on giok. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:32 AM (#1867254) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Lox And forsooth! |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:46 AM (#1867262) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Skipjack K8 Nah, it ain't Giok, he enjoys being unpopular |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:49 AM (#1867265) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: SINSULL Skip over the offending posts. Don't open the offending thread. In other words, control yourself. How hard is that? Mary |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:00 AM (#1867275) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,bemused Obviously far too hard for some Mary. And if shambles were blocked who would they go running to max about next? Do these people manage to control themselves in real life? Worrying somewhat. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:02 AM (#1867278) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: skipy I agree that all that say "don't read him" Skipy |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:16 AM (#1867289) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond "In other words, control yourself. How hard is that?" Well, you couldn't, so why expect others to? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:23 AM (#1867297) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Richard Bridge Some people have me frothing at the mouth faster than others. One was Gobson, and the old Gargoyle was another. There is of course another. Wonder who that could be? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:28 AM (#1867302) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST It's amazing the way that Shambles can polarize this group. He should be dealt with the exact same way that Martin Gibson was. There is obviously enough technology here to prevent MG from returning. Use it for Shambles too. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:34 AM (#1867307) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: SINSULL I had the same advice re:Martin Gibson. MG is gone; Shambles is next on the list; then who? Check the Help Threads - there is a new candidate in the offing. Ignore them and let Max et al spend time on more productive activities. They are aware of the the problem and certainly as annoyed by it as anyone here. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:41 AM (#1867309) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Barden of England The ones I'd like to see banned are the ones from GUEST. If you have an opinion then give it, and use your name. If you can't put up - then shut up. John Barden |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:44 AM (#1867310) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: John MacKenzie Members only posting then John? I think that's an excellent idea! G. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 12:18 PM (#1867341) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Grab This ain't any kind of "open letter". For starters, letters are *from* someone. That is, they finish, "Signed, ...". And secondly, an open letter is a public statement that you, personally, believe strongly in something. If you believe so little in what you're saying that you're not prepared to stick your name under it, why should anyone else give a damn about it? Not that I support Shambles' campaign against the admins in any way, but this is a right cop-out. Speak up in public, PM Max in private, or stay quiet altogether, but leave out the anonymous public sniping. FWIW, I doubt Giok started the thread. So far, he's not been backward in voicing his opinions and putting his name to them, so I don't see why he'd back out now. Graham. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 12:44 PM (#1867357) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond This really aughta be BS'd |
|
24 Oct 06 - 12:47 PM (#1867359) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles Closed threads and deleted posts |
|
24 Oct 06 - 12:49 PM (#1867363) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond Don't make their point FOR them Shambles...... |
|
24 Oct 06 - 01:10 PM (#1867386) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Big Mick For what it's worth, I think this is a horseshit thread. What will happen, will happen. It is designed to get another thread going on the same old topic by "someone" who would like to see another discussion on the same old topic. Time to ignore this thread, and this topic. As Max says, when the time and technology are right (and you can take it from me that it is being worked on) steps will be taken to end this stuff. In the meantime, ignore and enjoy watchin' 'em flop around trying desparately to get someone to rise to the bait. I will, how about you? Mick |
|
24 Oct 06 - 01:15 PM (#1867392) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond " Time to ignore this thread" Except that by posting, you did exactly the opposite.... So lets get a mod in here to lock this stupid thing.... Like any other message board worth its salt would do. "I think this is a horseshit thread" Well, there, at least, we reach. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 01:24 PM (#1867393) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Sandman I have no problems with Shambles, but I get pissed off with anonymous guests, who bring this forum into disrepute,. Dick Miles |
|
24 Oct 06 - 01:30 PM (#1867397) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D **ALL** sites should have security and be able to control what kind of posting they will allow. It is up to Max to decide. For years now, the basic course has been to be as free & open as seemed reasonable. It is inevitable that, with as many posters as we have and with Google indexing us, that many will find their way here. Max needs a way to deal with that, as well as with possible issues with 'members'...Shambles is only ONE issue, and not the worst....but no matter how it is decided, ANY decision needs to have ways to be enforced, and expecting ALL posters to "control themselves" in all situations is simply not practical, even if it is a nice thought. Human nature and all that. Let Max deal with it....(if Jeff had not had problems, it might already be done). In the meantime, try to imagine what it is like from the management's point of view...not just from your own personal notion of what should be done...or not done! It is not easy to make a decision....no matter what is decided, someone will object. Me, I think this place is pretty good, and I rather imagine it still will be, even if I don't agree totally with how everything is done. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 01:36 PM (#1867405) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST and expecting ALL posters to "control themselves" in all situations is simply not practical, even if it is a nice thought. bill we're not talking rocket science here. If some people are unable to not open a thread, which they do so on a regular basis, just to moan at shambles then should they be allowed near electrical items and kitchenware at all. Very, very weak willed individuals who have to have someone banned because their own self control is non existent. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 02:59 PM (#1867467) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bernard With the possible exception of someone making a direct personal attack against me (or someone I care about), nothing anyone posts could ever really upset me. I find the petty sniping and nit-picking pitiful. It is made worse by people mentioning the errant posters by name, and thus giving them something to gripe about. Leave them alone, as Big Mick says, and they will eventually get bored and go away. In the meantime, though, their behaviour is likely to get worse. That's the way children are - they find their naughtiness is getting some sort of attention, which feeds their need. If they are ignored, they become even naughtier to try to get the attention they have lost, until finally they get fed up and go looking elsewhere. I don't think it's too much to expect all posters to exercise some adult restraint. If they can't, as GUEST just said, keep them away from electrical equipment and sharp objects...! I suppose someone will now cite this posting as an example of someone not exercising restraint... HAH! |
|
24 Oct 06 - 03:19 PM (#1867483) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D well, it's no use debating. It's so nice some folks have the 'moral high ground' and have such great self-control. I, personally, have tried to have more, but durned if I don't give in sometimes! (and sometimes it just feels like a game...and you can't help doing something....like my 40 line parody sentence a few months ago. It wasn't helpful...but OH! it was fun! I have slowed down a lot, but I can't promise I would NEVER say anything else if it keeps going! The 'sharp objects and electrical equipment' metaphor is cute, but hardly helpful. What I said was true: You CANNOT make a rule/suggestion that 100% of ANY group will folow. (Did you ever try to tell people not to jaywalk? All you can do is make a few rules, enforce what you can of the worst infringements, and hope..) |
|
24 Oct 06 - 03:57 PM (#1867521) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: autolycus Bill,Bill,Bill. "It's no use debating" ??? If you think that, my friend, then - er , er, no,can't bring myself to ask. On the other hand, I think a lot of frustration among posters comes from being torn between your thought,Bill, namely what's the use debating? , and the wish to debate. What's also in all this,IMO, is the wish of many posters to say something which might be the final word; or, to put that another way, to write something which will have the effect of a knockout blow. And when the actual result is more responses, frustration sets in. And we all get irrelevant ,ignorant or uncomprehending answers. And responses outside our competence. I can fathom people who do want to debate with the Shambles of this world; I grasp why people would just ignore such threads; and why posters might simply proceed as though "annoying" posters were invisible. Those seem to me the three best possibilities. Trying to get someone like that 'deleted', in an open forum, seems to me a waste of time, space and effort. Debate, ignore the poster, or ignore the threads seem the sensible options. Ivor |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:03 PM (#1867530) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Mrs.Duck This is definitely a case of deja moo ie the feeling that you've heard all this bull before. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:04 PM (#1867531) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond Hands up, who here thinks they have Mudcats best interest in mind when they post an opinion on issues like this? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:04 PM (#1867533) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: jeffp Actually it's often a case of not wishing to debate, but also not wishing to let lies stand unchallenged. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:08 PM (#1867536) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond Is't that what the internet is for? A haven for lies??? LOL |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:09 PM (#1867538) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Lox I actually really want to get my teeth into this one. I'd love to get involved and I don't want to ignore it for one second. I just can't think of anything to say... Ah well ... see you all down the bagel shop ... |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:12 PM (#1867543) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: gnu Re: Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Big Mick - PM Date: 24 Oct 06 - 01:10 PM I'll try.... but I am so weak.... my apologies. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:26 PM (#1867554) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: McGrath of Harlow Shambles may go on a bit. Well, he does go on a bit. And then he starts going on again. And then he really gets into his stride... But he doesn't go out of his way to insult people, in the way Gibson did so obsessively and repeatedly. I hope some time Shambles will settle down and go back to being interesting, which he often has been. In the meantime I'd sooner see us put up with him. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:30 PM (#1867562) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Emma B I agree entirely with McGrath. How many times has Shambles been constantly reminded that it is Max's site? Well fine! Is it to be handed over to a self-appointed (and frequently nameless) lynching mob now? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:41 PM (#1867570) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST No emma, the lynching mob is anything but nameless. I could name the top ten now as could you. The reason they are easily named is because they are so secure in the knowledge they can act like a baying mob. Three of them at least are appointed mods on this site. Something is rotten here but it sure isn't shambles. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:42 PM (#1867571) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond " Something is rotten here but it sure isn't shambles." Everyone's farts stink |
|
24 Oct 06 - 04:52 PM (#1867581) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,Russ The Guest Bashing in this thread seems a bit half-hearted. Not like the old days. Russ (Permanent GUEST) |
|
24 Oct 06 - 06:02 PM (#1867627) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST That's because the behaviour that some take public objection to is being carried out by some members and some mods. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 06:07 PM (#1867631) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Seamus Kennedy My 2 cents - I'm in complete agreement with GUEST Bemused, and I'm 100% behind Shambles to post what he likes. If ya don't like it, don't read it, and don't respond to it. Some of you folks just can't do that, can you? Seamus |
|
24 Oct 06 - 06:38 PM (#1867659) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Azizi It seems to me that we are sliding down a slippery slope if a member of this forum is banned simply because some other members consider him or her to be annoying. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 06:39 PM (#1867662) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D Seamus....but the import of most of Shambles posts IS to make certain points TO both members and management. Otherwise, why make them? He is trying to get others to do something, and arguing for a certain standard of thinking & behavior & attitude & 'rules' (or lack of rules). He is calling into question the basic operations of the forum. Is it so startling that people responded when he was inserting comments into many threads and repeated them endlessly? There is now a certain limitation imposed to what he can do, but even that is work to follow and enforce......... I see the thrust of your comment, but I and many others do NOT think anyone should have the privilege to distract the forum this way, even if 'technically' we could say nothing. It is not an easy issue, but in the last analysis, it IS up to management...and finally, to Max. We, as they say, shall see what happens. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 06:52 PM (#1867671) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST but I and many others do NOT think anyone should have the privilege to distract the forum this way, even if 'technically' we could say nothing. It is not an easy issue, but in the last analysis, it IS up to management...and finally, to Max And MANY more of us have no problem with shambles. The same old top ten who have OCD when it comes to him should take a break from the 'net. I take it then that you think the mods calling for him to be banned are acting out of line. Like you say it is max's decision. They have no place to try and influence it. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:16 PM (#1867688) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D *smile*...well, he has made HIS position clear...sorta... so people can express their own opinions. Mods are members and have opinions. I see no absolute statement that Max's solution will BE a 'ban'...he just said "the matter will be dealt with"... Maybe there will be some sort of filter on the word 'perhaps' when found near the words 'our forum'..*grin* "And MANY more of us have no problem with shambles." ...no, I don't think so. Many more DO feel he should not continue his crusade as he has. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:25 PM (#1867693) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D (now, mind you, I have seen various posts from Shambles lately that were NOT related to that crusade....Roger does know about many things and could easily be here and share music and other things....and it would be MY preference the solution not need to go as far as banning. It would be best if he was simply convinced to relent in his 6 year + drive to get....whatever it is....done his way. The reason we are where we are, is that he doesn't let go the bone once he has it in his teeth......an admirable trait in some circumstances, but not when it is in someone else's forum where MOST are happy with how it is being run.) |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:27 PM (#1867695) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: kendall Shambles used to bug the hell out of me, but no longer. I don't even open his posts anymore. So, the oft repeated advice, if you don't like it, don't read it. It's easy once you get used to it. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:31 PM (#1867699) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Jeri Roger's posts won't ever do anything but irritate people. If you tnink you know what he wants, you're probably doing a lot of guessing and assuming. It isn't reasonable to think he's really trying to change anything if all his posts do is aggravate the people who could do the changing. For the record, I think the persistent Roger-baiters are as obnoxious as he is, as were Martin Gibson's. Some of them were the same, and there seems to be a base of folks who like playing with trolls. The problem is that all of this trolling/being trolled stuff is disruptive to the site. It's like someone who's dancing naked on the roadside and shouting at cars. People slow down to gawk. People yell back at him and tell him to knock it off, and others slow down to yell at THEM. Pretty soon you've got a huge traffic jam. Now, forget should/shouldn't. Forget blame. Look for the easiest, most effective solution. It's the gawkers/yellers who make the traffic jam, so it's their fault. But it's ridiculous to try to remove all of them, especially since others will keep coming and do the same thing. The naked, dancing, ranting guy isn't forcing anyone to block traffic, so the jam isn't really his fault. But if you remove him, you end the traffic jam. So Max posted a while ago inviting Shambles to leave. A reasonable person would have toned things down and hoped Max would change his mind. Either Roger Gall didn't get it, or he did and is perhaps thinking if Max wants him gone bad enough, Max can MAKE him go... ...whoops. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:35 PM (#1867703) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Emma B Personally I find this far more irritating and indefensible Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 24 Oct 06 - 03:48 PM tick tock, tick tock. We will soon be members only Shambles and you will soon be history. According to Max "Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can." That's about you leaving. Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 24 Oct 06 - 04:39 PM He will ask and ask until someone tells him what he wants to hear. If it takes forever then he will ask forever. But Shambles, your days are numbered...you don't have forever. According to Max "Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can." That's about you leaving. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:37 PM (#1867706) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: McGrath of Harlow Most traffic jams are caused in much less idiosyncratic and interesting ways. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:49 PM (#1867719) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST jeri when one dancing man is moved on there will always be another one to take his place eventually. Moving one dancing man does not stop traffic jams permanently. The way I see it is that if some of the rubber neckers causing the jams are also traffic police, they should be relieved of their duties. Banning someone who has an opinion that doesn't coincide with someone else's just gives out the message that bullying is more effective than actually expecting people to act like adults. Like everyone else who has said it - if you can't not read shambles posts go and get some professional help. You have serious control issues taht need addressing. That is only directed at his top ten OCD stalkers. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 07:54 PM (#1867725) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,Jim Martin What on earth is this all about? Doesn't seem to be a very good way of celebrating a 10th birthday! |
|
24 Oct 06 - 08:22 PM (#1867746) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Joe Offer Well, I have to say that I find a thread like this to be far more offensive than anything Shambles has ever posted. I think that Shambles has a valid perspective - I just wish he would not repeat it so incessantly. If we could disable copy-paste from his computer, he'd be quite tolerable. But I detest personal attacks, and I like anonymous personal attacks even less. The message starting this thread is both. I suppose I ought to close this thread, but my hunch is that closing it would cause more harm than good. At the very least, I'm moving it to the non-music section, because it sure as hell doesn't have anything to do with music. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 Oct 06 - 08:25 PM (#1867748) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Big Mick That's the only reason I didn't close it long ago, Joe. I think the whole thing is a waste of bandwidth. Anyone knows that I am no Shambles fan, but I thought then and still think that this thread has no value. Mick |
|
24 Oct 06 - 08:42 PM (#1867763) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST But it shows the level of support for him outweighs those who wish him to be banned. So it does serve a purpose of sorts. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 08:42 PM (#1867765) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Jeri I guessed there might have been a reason Max posted to the thread and didn't delete it. Probably just be a matter of time... |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:03 PM (#1867775) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D "But it shows the level of support for him outweighs those who wish him to be banned....." that is simply silly. Go read 5-6 years worth of posts and check your counts. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:08 PM (#1867780) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST I specifically said the level of support in this thread is in shamble's favour. Now that obviously wasn't the intention of the thread originator. But it doesn't make it silly. |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:18 PM (#1867788) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Emma B It may be over egging the pudding to say that the balance of opinion is in "Shambles favour" but certainly I think there is a strong backswell of opinion against those few who continually carp. insult, bait and demand action to have him removed |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:26 PM (#1867793) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Sorcha Hear hear Emma |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:27 PM (#1867794) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Fooles Troupe Loud shouting over eager lynch mobs are always a bad idea... "First it was the mentally deficient; cause everybody agreed that they should be got rid of for their own as well as humanity's benefit - then it was the homosexuals; they were obviously disgusting creatures violating God's Laws and befouling the planet - then it was the gypsies; cause every one knew they were mentally deficient ugly looking thieves and disliked them - then it was the Jews; cause every body hated them - but then they came for ME!..." |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:29 PM (#1867796) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: kendall I can ignore any man in the house! |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:47 PM (#1867808) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Azizi I agree with what Emma said [in her 24 Oct 06 - 09:18 PM post] I also agree with Guest Jim Martin's post. Imo, advocating banning a member who some other members consider to be annoying is a poor way to celebrate the 10th birthday of this forum. And as Foolestroupe's 24 Oct 06 - 09:27 PM comment illustrates, who's next on the list to be banned? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 09:52 PM (#1867812) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: number 6 "and still think that this thread has no value." counting the number of posts and the day isn't through yet, I would have to say this thread has value ..... then again should we question our values? biLL |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:00 PM (#1867820) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: WFDU - Ron Olesko While he may not agree, I am a supporter of Shambles. I think some of his gripes are valid and he should be vocal. I do think his repition and lack of skill in making his point does not work in his favor, but to ban someone simple because we find them annoying is something that would drive me away from these boards forever. As supporters of folk music, I am betting that many of us have been the victims of derision because of our musical tastes, politics, or length of our hair. I would have thought that we learned a little tolerance. We learned not to care what other people think of us, shouldn't we also have the same feelings for others? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 10:34 PM (#1867833) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: bobad "We learned not to care what other people think of us, shouldn't we also have the same feelings for others?" Right on Ron - whatever happened to those good ol' 60's values of peace, love and understanding? |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:11 PM (#1867843) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: catspaw49 When the baby arrives and Jeff's troubles have lightened there will be changes here. They are not because of Shambles but he will probably go down in the fallout. Both Max and Jeff are charged with the daunting task of bringing the site up to date to deal with the size it has become while still retaining as much of the old 'Cat and it's flavor as possible. The net continues to evolve and Mudcat will be forced to make changes simply because it has grown remarkably. 9-11 was a significant turning point for many here and everywhere else both in 3D and on the net. Before then we certainly had our share of political threads and fights but the fights were mild and the threads were few in comparison to what has happened since. Some minor changes that were made then such as the Guest tag for problems of id theft on the site ended up in creating additional issues. All things have escalated and, because Max has had a life of his own to live, some things have yet to be done here which are needed. The Mudcat Cafe is, and I hope will continue to be, a fun place and one where the camaraderie extends past the ether and into the real world. But it is still a website that can be both used and/or abused by millions. Most forums of this size have had to install some simple guidelines and rules as to registration and posting beyond those which are used here. I know that Max and Jeff will do their best to keep the 'Cat as close as possible to what it was, but I also know they realize the need for change. It's up to us to change with it. Max has always taken suggestions and I think he probably has plenty now. I'd bet he'll take suggestions in the future too. But the size of this place will mandate that some of those suggestions will get a "NO" as a reply. Roll with what comes and try to work into whatever they do. Its the only way to go. If we have to put on a profanity filter, then you will have heard the last "fuck" out of me. But if I can't live by the rules then I expect to be blocked. None of us are too excited over rules but sadly the real world and the ways of the net dictate them. As far as Shambles......He needs to expect the same as I do and perhaps he needs to spend some time at other larger forums. In most of them, postings like his which continually moan or complain past a certain point are deleted without note or explanation. Threads started to complain about the site administration or owner are deleted as well. Repeated attempts to do so result in the IP being blocked. I belong to and am one of probably a hundred or more Mods at a monster set of auto racing message boards where those rules (and more) are strictly enforced and ya' know something? Its a pretty friendly place and people talk about the sport and threads tend to stay on topic and jokes are made and points hammered home and things go pretty smoothly...........Imagine that? All those rules and it all seems to work. Shambles needs to realize this is the net and that his privilege to post is at the discretion of the site owner, not as an inalienable right. I have great confidence in Max and Jeff. They will design ways that DO retain the old Mudcat while addressing the problems that the times and size have created. Max has done a great job in simply keeping the joint running these past few years! They are both intelligent and creative people and I look forward to what the future brings and what it will be for us at the 'Cat. Spaw |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:17 PM (#1867845) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Amos Oh, Spaw, you are SUCH a suck-up!! LOL!!! A |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:21 PM (#1867847) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: catspaw49 Why of course I am you stupid ass!!! What? Like I should be like that broke-dick fuckwit Shambles and get banned? Not this fat boy! Spaw |
|
24 Oct 06 - 11:54 PM (#1867860) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond If the software here wasn't the worst of what 1996 had to offer, we'd have an "Ignore User" feature, like a decent message board That'd fix his little red wagon might quick |
|
25 Oct 06 - 12:01 AM (#1867863) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Ron Davies Max already said what he's doing about the problem. Anything else is noise--like all the posts that came after his post--including, of course, this one. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 03:03 AM (#1867910) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles THE POINT OF THIS WEB SITE IS HAPPINESS Max Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 12 May 06 - 11:15 AM >snip< My bad of course for messing with Roger. He doesn't see he's been messing with us for years, but.........And to some degree, your bad too. He's used an old quote hundreds of times and I know you'd like to have it that way (no rules) but it doesn't work once a site grows past a certain point which Mudcat has. Responding to Roger earlier might have saved some of this. I dunno'......So how about reinstating Roger and I'll agree to quit messing with him? Just ask him to back-off the campaign against Joe. No more censorship complaints. If he understands that we are all playing under the same rules perhaps......maybe he might........well its worth a shot isn't it? Roger has written some beautiful poetry and songs and staying in that vein, he needs to be a part of this community. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 03:06 AM (#1867912) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Fooles Troupe I do dislike the idea of 'banning', and even more so when it is 'forced' by a lynch mob - BUT, if there are sets of rules that are properly enforced (which, as I far as I can tell, seems to be one gripe buried among the cacophony!) then you break such rules at your peril. End of Story! :-) |
|
25 Oct 06 - 03:38 AM (#1867926) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: autolycus Posters seem on balance to have controls. I wonder if Joe, Max, and the ethos of the net is self-control, of taking personal responsibility? And if you can ignore my posts occasionally, why not ignore the Shambles if you don't like them? Ivor |
|
25 Oct 06 - 05:12 AM (#1867967) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: John MacKenzie There would appear to be an element of PC involved in some posts on this thread, you know the "I want to smack my child for misbehaving, but I don't do it because it's unfashionable and I'm trendy", sort of attitude. There is no lynch mob mentality, it is in the eye of the beholder, there is instead a growing number of people who's frustration at Shambles is such that they've abandoned their normal tolerant attitude, and given voice to their annoyance. Those that don't have the guts to use their names, or are afraid of losing their street cred, do it as a Guest, others tell it as they see it. Still doesn't make it a lynch mob in my book. Giok |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:18 AM (#1867991) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Not a lynch mob maybe - but still highly unpleasant. Shambles might be an arse, but to be so plain nasty about him is very distasteful. I think I'll leave the party now, its gone a bit sour hasn't it. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:54 AM (#1868017) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles I shall not sit around silent while some little obsessed wimp in Weymouth or thereabouts conducts a campaign of hatred against people who do a difficult job. I am not one of your mealy mouthed, wishy washy, sit on the fence liberals, who goes out of their way to make excuses for axe murderers and the like. I call it like I see it, and I am as determined to stop Shambles as he is to stop Joe doing his job. Yes I have a problem, I have a problem with people like Shambles being allowed to spoil this site for other people, for his being allowed to post his repetitive rubbish in thread after thread, in other words, I want him OUT. There now, I bet that came as a total surprise to you guest! Giok |
|
25 Oct 06 - 07:06 AM (#1868023) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: John MacKenzie Thanks for making my point for me Roger, far be it from me to indulge in repetitition when you are our acknowledged expert. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 07:14 AM (#1868034) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM Date: 24 Nov 05 - 04:21 AM Shambles you are a :- Self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous priggish, paranoid, prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetetive. No need to reply. G. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 07:18 AM (#1868038) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: catspaw49 Can't see it can you Roger? The forest is obscured by all of those big, tall, leafy, woody, things isn't it? That thing you quoted from me.......I meant it but you just can't stop can you? The vendetta against the way the 'Cat works is an assault on Max and your carping and moaning have gotten you nowhere except in a hole. Go read my last post and then try to read the following for comprehension and not speed. From Max as posted above on this thread: Our priority number 2 is to beef up the back end security of the site so that we can confront such issues. I cannot currently effectively enforce a ban on the savvy. It would be too easy for them to find a workaround and get back in, now angry. Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can. Read it again and let it soak in..........and again...............and again..............Can you see the forest yet? If not, read it again. Spaw |
|
25 Oct 06 - 08:06 AM (#1868067) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Azizi Imo, this issue is beyond the individual named Shambles. It seems to me that the central issue is the fairness of Mudcat forum rules across the board and how fairly those rules are enforced. It has been articulated that individual moderators have favorites. It has also been articulated that some individual moderators sometimes unfairly target those they do not favor. Whether this is true or not, I hope that Max will address these questions by putting in place protections to guard against this happening. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 08:23 AM (#1868085) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: jeffp There is a protection. It is called Max. Anything he doesn't like, he can reverse. If he doesn't like the actions of a moderator, that person will cease to be a moderator. It ain't a democracy, folks. It is what it is. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 08:39 AM (#1868099) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: jacqui.c Azizi - maybe that is why there are a number of moderators - that will iron out any perceived favouritism. From what I understand this problem arose about six years ago. He had one particular subject that occupied his mind and started a number of threads on the same subject. From what I can gather these threads were combined, which caused Roger to get rather upset. Later on the letters UK were put into the title. This was done to make the subject more clear to users but Roger got upset that 'his' thread title had been changed without his permission. I tend now to stay out of Shamble's thread but get irritated when he tries to carry on his fight against Joe, in particular, and the mods in general in other threads. If you check his posting history you will see what I mean. A number of us have tried to use reason with Roger and the same points are raised again and again and again by different people. None of this gets through to Roger and that does get VERY frustrating. I allowed myself to get to that point for a while but, once I finally realised that he is determined not to see any point of view but his own, I gave up banging my head against a brick wall. More recently Roger has been starting birthday threads for all sorts of performers, some of whom, IMO, do not really have anything to do with a folk and blues site. This was his reaction to a birthday thread being put in the BS section, rather than staying in the music section. IMO Roger's reaction to the general rules being enforced against him is childish and unreasonable. We only really hear from the vociferous few but, having talked to quite a number of Mudcatters in 3D this seems to be a prevalent view. From Max's statement in his 'State of the Union' it seems that he is also in agreement. It is quite likely now that Roger will cut and paste something that I have posted in the past that would appear to contradict this post or that he thinks supports his own view. That has happened before. All I can say is that with time and experience normality decrees that our positions will change to some degree on all but our real core values. That is called growing up. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:06 AM (#1868128) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Fooles Troupe "Life wasn't meant to be fair"... |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:19 AM (#1868142) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D "an "Ignore User" feature, like a decent message board" that 'feature' is almost always for a real time chat room, not for a message forum. It is to prevent someone from flooding an ongoing conversation with crap & nonsense, making it hard to follow a conversation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:30 AM (#1868173) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Let me get this straight - it's NOT childish to say "it's not my fault really, he made me do it!" ? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:39 AM (#1868185) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: jeffp Of course, we could always turn the conversation to anonymous shit-stirrers. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:40 AM (#1868187) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D Not what I said at all...but yeah, of course it is sorta ...ummmm...if not 'childish', at least disingenuous to claim "he made me do it". I'm trying to be a realist, though. People DO have different 'pain threshholds' and react differently. I don't suppose, oh 'guest', that YOU might have issues that make you see red and lose your cool?...hmmm? It is one thing to say you shouldn't whack your whiny kid....and another to note that he shouldn't BE whining that much. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:41 AM (#1868190) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond " that 'feature' is almost always for a real time chat room, not for a message forum" Bull... I could like to COUNTLESS message boards that have an "Ignore User" function... It's a very useful feature Wanna talk about something else you don't know as much as you think you do about? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:45 AM (#1868196) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Fooles Troupe "Da Debbil Made Me Do It!" |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:46 AM (#1868199) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D countless? Give me two... I've been to a few of each kind...never saw 'ignore' on forums....they just had serious moderation. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:55 AM (#1868215) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond Any vBulletin MB can enable the Ignore User feature... That you've never seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist does it? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:56 AM (#1868216) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: jeffp The Home Recording Bulletin Board has Ignore List capability. Of course, you have to be a registered user to use it. It also has the capability for users to give positive or negative reputation to other users, something which is sometimes used in a constructive way, other times in a completely childish one. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 09:57 AM (#1868217) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D hey! 100 |
|
25 Oct 06 - 10:03 AM (#1868225) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D ok, I see that jeffp has noted that 'ignore' is used on a board. I have a feeling that the feature would result in a lot of remarks ABOUT "ha, ha...I'm ignoring you" along with replies to THAT. It would be interesting. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 10:05 AM (#1868229) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,9.30 Congratulations Bill! It was a disingenous remark and have I ever lost my cool? Well, of course otherwise I wouldn't be posting here in total frustration at the attempts to humiliate and demonize a fellow poster and attempting to point out, in a non-abusive way, that neither 'side' in this interminable so-called discussion holds the 'moral high ground' IMHO |
|
25 Oct 06 - 10:07 AM (#1868232) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond phpBB can do "Ignore" as well |
|
25 Oct 06 - 10:15 AM (#1868235) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: SINSULL Strange but true: I enjoy the daily Birthday threads. At first, I admit, my reaction was "What is he up to now?" Then I remebered El Swanno's daily thread and realized that if anyone but Shanbles had introduced the Birthdays, it would be perceived as nothing more than what it was. So Happy Birthday Minnie Pearl! |
|
25 Oct 06 - 10:43 AM (#1868276) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST,Max (Geldray) Henry Crun: I'm going to sing moderrrrrn. Minnie Bannister: Well, I'll put my corsets on. Henry Crun: [taps his foot in rhythm] One two three four! [sings] Midda watchayacollum, whatcha doing tonight, Yeahhh! Taroo, I hope your in the mood cos I'm afeelin' alright. Ohhh go man go....etc etc. Orchestra: Highhat crash. Henry Crun: There Min. Let that be a lesson to you. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 11:12 AM (#1868306) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bert Well said Azizi. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 12:00 PM (#1868354) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: autolycus IMO, when you say,"They made me do it", you are not taking YOUR responsibility. It's the beginning of the blame game. Ivor |
|
25 Oct 06 - 12:17 PM (#1868373) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: John MacKenzie We live in a 'blame culture', if someone has got big clumsy feet and doesn't look where they're going, then trip over an uneven kerb. It's not an "Oh dearie me, I am a clumsy person". No,it's the council's fault the kerbstone was knocked askew by a truck not ½ an hour ago, and we shall immediately sue the crap out of them. It's what I call the irresponsible society. G. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 12:29 PM (#1868387) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond What Ivor said!! No one MAKES you do anything, especially on the internet! |
|
25 Oct 06 - 01:42 PM (#1868448) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Joe Offer The birthday threads are obviously intended to be obnoxious, but the nice thing about them is that we can add actual music information to them and reverse the obnoxiousness. -Joe- |
|
25 Oct 06 - 01:59 PM (#1868467) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: pdq It is unclear to most Mudcatters just how many moderators there are. Most members know the identities of four or five. If there is to be a real shakeup, how about adding more moderators? I humbly suggest Shambles, DougR, Old Guy and Ron Olesko. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM (#1868470) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D 'humbly'? *grin*...sounds like 'fiendishly' to me. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 02:25 PM (#1868489) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles The birthday threads are obviously intended to be obnoxious, but the nice thing about them is that we can add actual music information to them and reverse the obnoxiousness. -Joe- Piffle How do you or anyone else know what the intention of the the birthday threads was intended to be or indeed what the intention of any thread is? And would it matter? The intention of a thread can be positive as you like but any suspicious and paranoid assumption such as this or any subsequent post can turn any thread into something far less positive. Just as a less than positivly intended thread can end up being very positive indeed and the credit will be to the posters. One thing is sure - a less positively inteded thread can't be made positive if it is closed. You can take a little credit for not closing or moving these birthday threads if you like. But not for the opportunity to place musical information in them - for that was - and is their intention. Whatever misinformation you may provide to our forum |
|
25 Oct 06 - 02:26 PM (#1868490) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Emma B I really can't comment whether the birthday threads were intended to be provocative (unlike some of my fellow posters I don't profess to have the ability to read minds) but obnoxious? - give us a break! However starting a thread with the sole purpose of banning someone from the forum would certainly fall into that category. It's fair to say moreover that, initially, the birthday threads were met with the "typical" nastiness we have come to expect which I for one considered misplaced and insulting to the muscians being celebrated |
|
25 Oct 06 - 02:31 PM (#1868497) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: MMario Of course on cannot *know* the intent of a poster - but when that poster Complains about birthday threads and their content and their treatment, then begins to post multiple birthday threads, one can get a pretty good idea of what the intent appears to be to the rest of the world. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 02:53 PM (#1868510) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Wolfgang The starting of multiple birthday threads by Shambles is just as honest and upright as when he posts You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread. Wolfgang |
|
25 Oct 06 - 04:22 PM (#1868565) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: nutty Well - I for one would far rather have a posting from Shambles (irritating though it may be) than the absolute filth being peddled in the name of art in such threads as The S&M Man. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 04:50 PM (#1868584) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST So Clinton has come up with the best solution, an IGNORE button. Do you think the few shambles OCD'ers would use it? Would they hell, they need him banned as it is all a power trip game for them. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 05:01 PM (#1868588) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: gnu Hehehehe... I just re-read the first post to remind myself of what all this was about. Then, I read the last post (25 Oct 06 - 04:50 PM) to this thread. I am so glad I didn't read any in between. Hey... struck me funny. See you again in a few days, maybe. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 05:26 PM (#1868609) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: dwditty Paltalk has an ignore function. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 05:56 PM (#1868635) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Clinton Hammond "So Clinton has come up with the best solution" The best solution is both, an Ignore Poster option, and Members Only posting on the forum |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:01 PM (#1868639) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: GUEST Ah yes of course. For those not able to IGNORE guests. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:15 PM (#1868648) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Richard Bridge Have any of the posters here read "Lord of the Flies"? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:17 PM (#1868649) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: cobra Who said you could speak? Are you holding the conch? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 06:58 PM (#1868675) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Bill D *shrug*..if Max decides to have an 'ignore' button, I won't argue...it 'might' help a bit, but it might just lead to more squabbling. I'm not sure about 'members only'...I see the virtues, but also the drawbacks. |
|
25 Oct 06 - 07:01 PM (#1868678) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: Becca72 The beauty of an Ignore button is we then don't have to see the complaints about being ignored, though, isn't it? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 07:07 PM (#1868681) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: The Shambles Whatever Max's intentions may have been for starting our forum - to use his words. It will be what we make it... PERIOD |
|
25 Oct 06 - 08:14 PM (#1868710) Subject: RE: Open Letter to Max From: McGrath of Harlow Fresh Caribou Tongue 1 3-pound tongue 2 cups water I tablespoon salt 14 teaspoon pepper 2 bay leaves 6 whle cloves I medium onion, quartered 1. Wash tongue thoroughly with water and brush. 2. Place clean tongue on rack in pot, add water, salt, pepper, bay leaves, cloves and onion. 3. Plunge hot cookedtongue into cold water, then remove skin. 5. Strain liquid and pour over tongue. liceand serve hot with Spanish Sauce. (From the Northern Cookbook)
Goodnight, Shambles. -Joe Offer- |