mudcat.org: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]


BS: Censorship on Mudcat

George Papavergis 23 Mar 05 - 12:55 PM
Noreen 23 Mar 05 - 12:48 PM
The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 12:47 PM
Wolfgang 23 Mar 05 - 12:33 PM
George Papavgeris 23 Mar 05 - 12:28 PM
The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 12:25 PM
The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 12:09 PM
Peace 23 Mar 05 - 10:16 AM
Little Hawk 23 Mar 05 - 09:57 AM
Wolfgang 23 Mar 05 - 09:47 AM
GUEST 23 Mar 05 - 09:33 AM
GUEST,The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 06:35 AM
Paco Rabanne 23 Mar 05 - 06:09 AM
GUEST,The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 05:57 AM
Azizi 23 Mar 05 - 04:34 AM
GUEST,The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 02:02 AM
The Shambles 23 Mar 05 - 01:51 AM
Big Mick 22 Mar 05 - 08:59 PM
Azizi 22 Mar 05 - 08:58 PM
Azizi 22 Mar 05 - 08:52 PM
Big Mick 22 Mar 05 - 08:28 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 08:21 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 06:52 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 03:50 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 03:49 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 03:32 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 02:43 PM
Noreen 22 Mar 05 - 01:25 PM
George Papavergis 22 Mar 05 - 01:18 PM
Big Mick 22 Mar 05 - 01:07 PM
George Papavergis 22 Mar 05 - 12:49 PM
John MacKenzie 22 Mar 05 - 12:49 PM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 11:44 AM
Wolfgang 22 Mar 05 - 11:36 AM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 11:20 AM
Paco Rabanne 22 Mar 05 - 11:19 AM
Noreen 22 Mar 05 - 11:15 AM
Paco Rabanne 22 Mar 05 - 11:06 AM
The Shambles 22 Mar 05 - 10:57 AM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 01:16 AM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 22 Mar 05 - 12:20 AM
Peace 22 Mar 05 - 12:08 AM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 22 Mar 05 - 12:04 AM
Peace 21 Mar 05 - 07:19 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 21 Mar 05 - 07:17 PM
Peace 21 Mar 05 - 07:06 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 21 Mar 05 - 07:04 PM
Peace 21 Mar 05 - 06:59 PM
Big Mick 21 Mar 05 - 05:26 PM
Azizi 21 Mar 05 - 04:01 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavergis
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:55 PM

Reflective posters are useless, Noreen - you can't read them!

Roger,

there are some (very few) cases where deletion could be allowed, I think, namely when a potentially libellous comment has been made; or when personal information about someone has been disclosed, that could be open to abuse; that would be to keep Max safe from prosecution, as the owner of the forum.

But overall, I agree with you - let everyone post according to their knowledge, temperament and conscience; and let everyone else allow them the freedom to do so. We are big boys and girls and can deal with some abuse; and if we can't, we go somewhere else to play.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Noreen
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:48 PM

No, they're not always right, but I agree with their judgement.

On the odd occasion when one of them has 'cracked' (as they are only human, unlike Max...) due to incessant illogical argument being repeated at them, the event has been reflected on and apologised for, if necessary.

Would that all posters were as reflective.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:47 PM

Roger/Shambles:

If you were to become a clone, exactly what would you do to change things? Please be specific. I have read your many posts that remark on the present volunteers and what they do. What exactly would you do differently?


If you have read my many posts you will have already seen the answer to your question. Anonymous or known volunteer judges do not solve this problem - as currently structured - they create a different problem. I have no wish to join their ranks - although I am sure they will all be glad to have me....

Whatever our volunteers think - and despite their attempts to shape our forum by their imposed judgement, deltions and closures - it is the public and the example set by them - that will continue to shape our forum. So what is done differently - is up to you and me........

1 Every poster should always be encouraged to accept that this is a public discussion forum where everyone has been invited by Max to contribute on an equal basis.

2 It is not a courtroom or a market where we are encouraged to judge each other's suitability to post.

3 That the example we set - positive or negative - judgemental or accommodating - will be followed.   

How is that for a start?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Wolfgang
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:33 PM

Perhaps you could also answer a question? (Shambles)

'Also' is hilarious as you don't, but I can oblige:

No.

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:28 PM

Roger,

What you just said doesn't stack up. If you accept Max's arbitrary judgement, as you say, why do you not accept the delegation of such judgement to the volunteers? It is still arbitrary, so what's the difference? Why is one Max's arbitrary judgement better than another's? After all, being omnipotent, he can always retract the delegation - but his (arbitrary) judgement remains that the delegation works.

A sort of "he sees it - and it is good".

Glory be to Max.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:25 PM

Perhaps the whole quote should be provided or if not - some indication should be provided that you have 'snipped' it? What i said was -

However I would and do seriously doubt and question if this omnipotence is a quality that can ever be delegated without totally messing-up the rest of us mortals?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 12:09 PM

Wolfgang

Max is everywhere and sees all.

Discussions do develop. This conversation had moved on to the point made by Azizi about right or wrong and if the power to determine this had been delegated. My point is that the site owners arbitary judgement can be accepted without too much trouble but the delegation of this arbitary judgement to many others - presents more problems. As demonstrated.

Perhaps you could also answer a question?

For would you say it then follows that - even when stting the example of not following the guidelines themselves and mounting personal attacks from this responsible and influential position - that Joe, Big Mick, Jeri, Catspaw and the anonymous volunteers are alway right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 10:16 AM

Roger/Shambles:

If you were to become a clone, exactly what would you do to change things? Please be specific. I have read your many posts that remark on the present volunteers and what they do. What exactly would you do differently?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 09:57 AM

"Fascinating," as Spock used to say...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Wolfgang
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 09:47 AM

Whenever I read someone (Spaw etc.) arguing seriously with Shambles I think by myself, don't they know by now that he never addresses the points made in such serious posts but only repeats himself as if he could not engage in a real conversation? But once in a while I get tempted to engage in what I consider a completely futile attempt when I see it by others. No, I don't think my attempt is any better (rather the opposite), I just feel it's my turn.

The forum is not a demoracy and Max is omnipotent. However I would and do seriously doubt and question if this omnipotence is a quality that can ever be delegated (Shambles)

I do not at all understand what you mean, Shambles. (1) If you complain about the delegation act as such, then you have to complain to Max, as Jon has often pointed out without getting a reasonable response. (2) If you want to say that omnipotence cannot be delegated you're shooting down a straw-man for delegation of omnipotence was never the matter. It would be new to me, for instance, that the clones (and the original) could shut down the forum. Max has delegated a part of his power, complain to him if you object to that.

Your next paragraph ("for would you say it then follows that...") is an exercise in illogical argumentation. It presupposes nonsense and therefore the 'conclusion' you want us to disagree with (the anonymous volunteers are always right) does not follow at all. And BTW, Max is omnipotent in the sense of being able to shut down this site but from that does not follow he is right whenever he does something. These are two very different concepts.

Passing judgement upon the worth of another contributor's entire personality

You do it implicitely and not explicitely, Shambles, so don't complain if someone does it explicitely. From my point of view, you pass judgement for instance about my ability to understand what I read by reposting with slightly changed words the same arguments and by copying and reposting something everybody has already read themselves. You judge that I need the repetition for getting the correct understanding. I wish you could accept that I for instance read what you read, see what you see and still don't share your opinion. After the first couple of times any further repetition implicitely declares anybody else as dumb. I object to that.

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 09:33 AM

The judgement emits on the value of the post of another contributing - with the judge if to answer - how to answer or be unaware of it - what do everything we as an element of a discussion here.

Émettre the judgement on the value of the whole personality of another contributing based on what they announces - is not the same thing. It is futile and against-productive - as this contributing still do not want any post of doubt (however them in value can be judged by you) - as as the remainder of us - they have that to announce well - as the maximum always prolonged this invitation with all the public.

They well then do not want any beginning of doubt to judge the value of your whole personality in the return - and so on.......

In any public place - we will find the things which are with our taste and things which are not and we choose outward journey with the sectors where the things are with our taste. It is similar on our forum. It was described like large house with a different part continuing in each room.

A tolerant attitude would see us opening the door and passing - if the part in this room were not with our taste. We would test another door until we found a part which was with our taste. For the minute we close this door and let us not reopen it more - with regard to us - the part of the fact the part.

What seems to be produced and finished time encouraged - is that although the house is enough large to adapt to all the parts - some posters seems to insist on the fact that the part of which is not with their taste and of which nobody forces them to be occupied - is the stop.....

Because there is no lack of anonymous volunteers ready to make closing-towards bottom - it seems y to have more and more closing-towards bottom and more and more a more useless and against-more productive judgement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 06:35 AM

Passing judgement upon the worth of another contributor's post - to judge whether to respond - how to respond or to ignore it - is what we all do as part of a discussion here.

Passing judgement upon the worth of another contributor's entire personality based on what they post - is not the same thing. It is futile and counter-productive - as that contributor will no doubt post again (however their worth may be judged by you) - as like the rest of us - they have that right to post - as Max has always extended that invitation to all of the public.

They will then no doubt start to judge the worth of your entire personality in return - and so on.......

In any public place - we will find things that are to our taste and things that are not and we choose to go to areas where things are to our taste. It is the same on our forum. It has been described as a big house with a different party going on in each room.

A tolerant attitude would see us opening the door and moving on - if the party in that room was not to our taste. We would try another door until we found a party that was to our taste. For the minute we close that door and don't re-open it - as far as we are concerned - the party in that room is over.

What appears to have happened and encouraged over time - is that although the house is big enough to accommodate all the parties - some posters seem to insist that the party that is not to their taste and which no one is forcing them to attend - is shut-down.....

As there is no lack of anonymous volunteers prepared to do the shutting-down - there appears to be more and more shutting-down and more and more needless and counter-productive judgement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 06:09 AM

Brucie has spoilt what was otherwise a thought provoking, nay dazzling thread, by posting 300 for no good reason!!! I demand that he be deleted from space and time for ever!!! I am offended, such behaviour is obnoxious!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 05:57 AM

Aren't there times that it does matter who is right and who is wrong? And how is 'right' and 'wrong' determined? Who determines right and wrong? Isn't it usually those in power?

On our forum, I would strongly suggest that from its history, that who is right and who is wrong has never really mattered. That is why this forum was different. However, Joe - in his posts lately - has decided that what he judges to stay or goes - is not a matter of right or wrong.

On this discussion forum, with regard to censorship-the topic of this thread-doesn't Max have the power and hasn't he delegated that power to Joe and "Joeclones?"

As site owner Max to me is the one GOD. The forum is not a demoracy and Max is omnipotent. However I would and do seriously doubt and question if this omnipotence is a quality that can ever be delegated without totally messing-up the rest of us mortals?

For would you say it then follows that - even when stting the example of not following the guidelines themselves and mounting personal attacks from this responsible and influential position - that Joe, Big Mick, Jeri, Catspaw and the anonymous volunteers are alway right?


As for which song - none of of them are right or wrong so whatever songs we do sing - will be fine. It is the singing together that matters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 04:34 AM

Roger, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the song that you wrote in 1999 and that you are pointing us to in 2005 was and is posted in a spirit of reconciliation with a theme of   unity inspite of diversity.

A portion of your song is

"We have different views
That's the way it'll always be
It don't matter who's right or wrong
We'll just agree to disagree"

-snip-

My Virgoian detail oriented nature mixed with my Sagittarius see the larger picture nature causes me to ask:
Aren't there times that it does matter who is right and who is wrong? And how is 'right' and 'wrong' determined? Who determines right and wrong? Isn't it usually those in power?

On this discussion forum, with regard to censorship-the topic of this thread-doesn't Max have the power and hasn't he delegated that power to Joe and "Joeclones?"

And with regard to your refrain:

"I look forward to that day
And I hope it won't be long
When we all get to sing the same song"

-snip-

Again, the words sound well meaning, and I'd love to give you the benefit of the doubt that they are meant well...

Yet I have to ask, given the different views that you mentioned in your verse that I cited above, who determines the song that we all get to sing? Sounds to me like that might start a whole 'nuther arguement-excuse me-discussion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 02:02 AM

A Song For Mudcatters


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Mar 05 - 01:51 AM

Make Shambles a Clonehead


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:59 PM

Actually, Azizi, the Roger you see in the other threads is the one that I used to enjoy reading and occasionally jousting with. He is a very good poster when he doesn't get hung up in this stuff, IMO.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:58 PM

And I let me go on record to say that I also will defend Shambles' right and anyone else's right to post whatever they want as long as what they post does not violate the posting guidelines.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:52 PM

We're still waiting...

Maybe Shambles is writing on other threads.

I've noticed that some of his post are on other subjects. So it's not fair to say that Shambles only has a one track mind.

It's just that so much of his track seems to go in this direction.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:28 PM

...and the silence was deafening.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:21 PM

Refresh


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 06:52 PM

Roger/Shambles:

If you were to become a clone, exactly what would you do to change things? Please be specific. I have read your many posts that remark on the present volunteers and what they do. What exactly would you do differently?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 03:50 PM

Yep--the BIG 300


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 03:49 PM

299


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 03:32 PM

Roger/Shambles:

If you were to become a clone, exactly what would you do to change things? Please be specific. I have read your many posts that remark on the present volunteers and what they do. What exactly would you do differently?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 02:43 PM

Xander: It could be an opinion as to what someone should do. It was not directed at or to Roger. It was a general statement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Noreen
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:25 PM

Ah, since you put it like that, Wolfgang:
I disagree with flamenco ted's mathematical deductions, but I will defend to the death his right to post them.

296 by the way


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavergis
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:18 PM

...and my opinion is that Roger simply feels strongly about the way he perceives the moderation of this forum. I have no reason to think otherwise, and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:07 PM

My opinion is that this is all about Shambles getting attention and gratification here that he can't get elsewhere. Fair enough, but could he come up with a new thing to bitch about for the next 7 years? This one is getting tired.

Sorry HG, but that is my opinion. And for what it is worth, it is him that keeps bringing it up. My opinion is that this is an affliction for which there is help.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavergis
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:49 PM

No - telling him to shut the f#ck up is an instruction, an order. Certainly no opinion. Unless you usually issue your opinions in the form of orders...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:49 PM

And a valid contribution in the circumstances Brucie, but then some people apparently don't know about the old adage, 'Quit while you're ahead'
Giok ¦¬]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:44 AM

Duct taping someone's mouth is censorship.

Telling that person to shut the f#ck up is opinion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:36 AM

No its not (Noreen)

Noreen, you are passing your personal judgement on the worth of another poster's contribution. You are on the slippery slope leading directly into the next holocaust:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Wolfgang (:-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:20 AM

You two want to be alone?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:19 AM

Stop it Noreen, or I will have you deleted! Oh, 400 by the way! Leadfingers, eat my shorts!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Noreen
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:15 AM

No its not


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:06 AM

Shambles,
         I totally agree with whatever it is you just said. Oh, 300 by the way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:57 AM

Flamenco Ted

If for your game - you wish your 100th post claims to remain and not be routinely deleted by our anonymous volunteers - the answer is simple. You post to make your claim but you also make a positive contribution to the thread that does add to the sum of human knowledge - on the lines of this one (and others) -

Because this is all a silly game by a pitiful man who gets his validation from the abuse heaped on him.

Such a positive contributions as this are safe from judgement and editing action by our volunteers - mainly because this was posted by one of them - and even when another posters states that they consider this post to be objectional and a personal attack upon another poster - it remains. This objection is simply noted (by the volunteer that made it!!!

So that is the fine example being set by our volunteers - for the rest of us to follow - if you wany your post to remain - you also make an abusive personal attack on someone.......?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:16 AM

This is getting VERY COMplicated.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:20 AM

Yeah.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:08 AM

Should I stand the ostrich above the pot of boiling water?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:04 AM

Try holding up a stopwatch, set to 3 minutes, and a loaded gun, aimed at the ostrich. Look at the ostrich meaningfully as the seconds tick away toward zero. I predict the ostrich will produce the egg on time in 9 out of 10 cases. In the 10th case you fire the gun, makin' sure to just barely miss the ostrich, and the ostrich WILL produce an egg on the spot. This method has never failed for me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 07:19 PM

Got that right. I have this pet ostrich, and getting a three-minute egg from one of hern is a real chore.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 07:17 PM

Could be. Either that or ya gotta get the element on the stove up to full temperature first and then ya start timin' it. It's tricky. When the eggs come out too hard or too soft, I line 'em up on the windowsill and use 'em for target practice. Or I would...if I hadn't cracked 'em open already. Ain't that a bitch? If there was a way of determinin' whether the egg ain't done right WITHOUT crackin' it open then it would be a lot better all around.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 07:06 PM

Dang! That's it. So, like, ya start timing the egg when ya turn the stove on, right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 07:04 PM

My guess is, brucie, long enough so you know it's done. You don't want an underdone 3 minute egg, right? When I was still a young and inexperienced chimp, I heard it said that the watched pot never boils. I didn't believe it. I went out and got this pot, took it home, and sat down and watched it....for 15 hours! It never boiled. THEN I remembered, you gotta turn the stove on first.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:59 PM

Sorry for the thread drift here, but does anyone know how long ya cook a three-minute egg for?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Big Mick
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 05:26 PM

Your opinion is duly noted, HG.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 04:01 PM

And the USA President & Congress!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 2 June 2:29 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.