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 Papavgeris 27 Apr 05 - 06:08 AM
The Shambles 27 Apr 05 - 05:52 AM
George Papavgeris 27 Apr 05 - 05:35 AM
The Shambles 27 Apr 05 - 05:22 AM
Wolfgang 27 Apr 05 - 05:11 AM
George Papavgeris 27 Apr 05 - 05:02 AM
Paco Rabanne 27 Apr 05 - 04:58 AM
GUEST,autoshambles 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM
GUEST,autoshambles 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM
GUEST,autoshambles 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM
GUEST,Jon 27 Apr 05 - 04:50 AM
George Papavgeris 27 Apr 05 - 04:06 AM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 09:14 PM
GUEST 26 Apr 05 - 09:03 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 08:56 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Apr 05 - 08:30 PM
GUEST 26 Apr 05 - 08:18 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 08:12 PM
Joe Offer 26 Apr 05 - 08:03 PM
Chris Green 26 Apr 05 - 07:57 PM
Bill D 26 Apr 05 - 07:44 PM
GUEST 26 Apr 05 - 07:36 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 07:23 PM
Jeri 26 Apr 05 - 07:21 PM
Jeri 26 Apr 05 - 07:19 PM
Jeri 26 Apr 05 - 07:19 PM
GUEST,Jon 26 Apr 05 - 07:10 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 07:02 PM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 06:10 PM
jeffp 26 Apr 05 - 05:17 PM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 05:09 PM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 05:08 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 05:03 PM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 03:41 PM
jeffp 26 Apr 05 - 03:03 PM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 02:45 PM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 12:21 PM
Gervase 26 Apr 05 - 10:48 AM
Paco Rabanne 26 Apr 05 - 10:29 AM
GUEST,MMario 26 Apr 05 - 10:18 AM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 10:14 AM
GUEST,Same Veteran Member Again 26 Apr 05 - 10:08 AM
Paco Rabanne 26 Apr 05 - 09:51 AM
jeffp 26 Apr 05 - 09:43 AM
The Shambles 26 Apr 05 - 09:40 AM
George Papavgeris 26 Apr 05 - 09:31 AM
Paco Rabanne 26 Apr 05 - 09:28 AM
GUEST,Jon 26 Apr 05 - 09:26 AM
Paco Rabanne 26 Apr 05 - 09:26 AM
Paco Rabanne 26 Apr 05 - 09:21 AM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 06:08 AM

Three in a day, 7 in 4 weeks... If this keeps up, I won't need a new April Fool's next year, we'll just use the same.

What firing line, Roger? No guns pointed at you, as far as I can see. You posted your views, and we disagreed. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. You posted them again, and we disagreed again. And so on.

On the way, some got frustrated by your repetition and seeming inability to comprehend the responses you were getting or to answer any questions asked of you. That turned the conversation into a shambles (pun fully intentional) and a rigmarole. And some got offended by it - very understandably. Even worse, the impression you gave by all this repetition and childish attempts to sidetrack questions (just like you did just now) has been - how shall I put it? Listen to the first verse of the Beatle's "Fool on the hill" and you'll get an inkling.

Ah - but will you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 05:52 AM

The thread that El Greko started (in March – which claimed to be a April fool) - whilst pretending to be Xander (in order it would appear - to argue with himself) Mudcat Censorship – a proposal does make for interesting reading.

It starts off with the following I have watched the "Censorship on Mudcat" thread with dismay, as more and more attacks were made at Roger (Shambles) and the main issue became clouded.

It is interesting to see how the (completely bogus) impression given that Xander could even slightly seen to be posting in any form of support for the views that I honestly hold, express and evidence – is received. Also interesting how this is commented on - by posters who quite understandably assume Xander to be who he claims to be and have no reason to think he is not.

I am content to let folk make their own judgements and I make no claim to have legions of supporters –– but should posters reading these threads be too surprised at the apparent lack of anyone - openly willing to place themselves in the firing line?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 05:35 AM

Respect, Roger - your private conversations are your own and I for one have no interest in them. The three questions referred to your inviting an opinion from Max, and not to the precise details of any response.

I realise however that the three questions are in fact redundant by now. Max is bound to have seen the thread, and very likely Joe might have also mentioned it to him. The absence of any response from Max is very eloquent in itself - after all, why should he get involved in silliness such as this?

Accordingly, you should therefore now cease invoking "Max's wishes" or your interpretation of them, in support of your theories on censorship.

As for refreshing this thread - you yourself said that chasing the n00th post is not offensive or to be censored.

So don't you try to censor us


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 05:22 AM

For Wolfgang and anyone else.

So whatever new names can be found to call me and however many HTML variations are used to say it - whatever passes between me and any other party - will remain private. Perhaps this and many other things - can be respected and those that wish to can return to sensible discussion and those that do not - can find another thread to refresh - that interests them more than this one obviously does?

OK?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 05:11 AM

As you make no public apology for any of your insulting comments in posts here - I see no reason why I should answer any public demand coming from you. (Shambles)

Shambles, you have been asked the same questions by different members and instead of giving a clear response have repeated the above post by you. Since this post does obviously not apply to all the members that have asked you the same set of questions you could perhaps answer to those for which the above evasive answer doesn't apply.

Or are you playing a child? "I won't respond to you before Catspaw (or whoever) doesn't apologise to me."

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 05:02 AM

Aaarrgghhhh!!


LOL, Jon


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:58 AM

I have a peaceful easy feeling that there is a 1000th post to be had here. Terence, are you up for the challenge? Oh, sorry, I forgot, you don't get up till 2pm do you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,autoshambles
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM

Well, I can't log in, either, so I don't have access to proof one way or another. Generally, the 100th/200th claims are a no-no in music threads and in many serious discussions. People have come to think of them as obnoxious. I don't know why, but that's what they think. I don't bother with them, but they're fair game for the Clones. -Joe Offer-[Not in brown]
This is clear evidence that Joe and his evil empire are destroying our forum which Max invites us to post to


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,autoshambles
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none.
This is clear evidence that Joe and his evil empire are destroying our forum which Max invites us to post to


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,autoshambles
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:51 AM

Grant our members and guests the serenity to accept the things they cannot change - the courage to change the things they can - and the wisdom to realise that this is a forum open to the public and that they have no control over the posts and ideas of others
This is clear evidence that Joe and his evil empire are destroying our forum which Max invites us to post to


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:50 AM

A bit of originality would help this conversation

Funny, I tried to write an "autoshambles" last night. I changed my mind on what it should do but maybe I will give this version a whirl and see if it works.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Apr 05 - 04:06 AM

Morning, Roger - you were up late, I see.
Or should I call you Laocoon?
You can call me what you like, if you get confused between reality and April Fools - I wooden shout myself horse in protest. Take it as a gift from me.

Sad person that I am, I went back and counted the instances of your repetition of the El Greko-or-Xander gripe: 6 in 4 weeks, twice in the last 3 days. I won't even attempt to count the number of times you brought Joe, the clones and censorship up, I bet dollars to peanuts the number is in the hundreds.

Bless you, Roger, but you're getting samey. A bit of originality would help this conversation. It may be pointless, but it doesn't have to be boring. Have you really exhausted all the possible logical cul-de-sacs you can lead us down? We follow you faithfully, but do try to make it more interesting!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:14 PM

and Shambles, I don't think I am likely to be censored either, but I'd like to believe that it's my genteel nature and mild manners that keep me safe. I certainly don't think my deep respect and reverential relationship with Joe and Max have anything to do with it.

The first bit may save you Bill - but it can only be working very hard at cultivating the second bit - that saves Catspaw *Smiles*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:03 PM

There are two cases detailed in this thread alone (and many others that I have evidenced) - where it is shown that this trust was misplaced.

So surely if Max's trust has been misplaced, that should be of concern to him? Why don't you tell him?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 08:56 PM

So it's OK for Max to be burdened with processing written reports (rather than put some trust in the people he appoints) and at the same time not to be expeceted to sort out squabbles.

There are two cases detailed in this thread alone (and many others that I have evidenced) - where it is shown that this trust was misplaced. All of this does a lot of harm to our forum especially when it is simply defended and remains unchanged - until the next time.

I suggested that if they should remain - that volunteers having to fill out written reports was one way of limiting these types of incorrect imposed editing - for really minor things and general 'tinkering' with other people's posts that could easily be left alone. Max does not have to ever read them.......*Smiles*

The best solution would be to have no routine imposed editing at all. In truth - the only editing action that Max really needs to decide on is if he wishes the libellious or rare extreme posting to remain on his website. These are rare and can easily be brought to his attention.

The rest is up to us.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 08:30 PM

Ah...

Perhaps a similar process here - where every imposed editing action required a written report to be submitted to Max for his approval - may have the same effect and result in less imposed judgement and a more proportiate approach?

So it's OK for Max to be burdened with processing written reports (rather than put some trust in the people he appoints) and at the same time not to be expeceted to sort out squabbles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 08:18 PM

Is it Max's fault that we can't get along and up to him to sort out and rule on every squabble and try to ensure that folk don't see anything here that might offend them?

Hang on a minute Shambles, wasn't it you who wanted all editorial judgments to go to Max?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 08:12 PM

Jon WE are all posters to the forum - WE are the public that Max invited to contribute. From that point on - it is all of US that create all the problems - like abusive personal attacks and responding in kind.

Is it Max's fault that we can't get along and up to him to sort out and rule on every squabble and try to ensure that folk don't see anything here that might offend them?

It is my view that the current 'system' of having some trusted volunteers who can now as a matter of routine impose their tastes upon others and who feel they have to edit in response to every minor concern - is only in the long-run - going to add to the problems this system is set up to address. The strength of the forum was always that everyone was encouraged to post on an equal basis. Is this not now thought to be important?

I am not really interested in apportioning blame for the harm the (largely well-intentioned) current 'system' is doing to our forum - just in trying - before it is too late - to ensure that The Mudcat Forum remains a special place - and does not become just another website - with threats and ever more petty restrictions and needless judgements being imposed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 08:03 PM

Hmmmm. Shouldn't the phrase be, "Beware of gifts beairng Greeks"?

And Bill, I can't recall if I censored you ar not. I certainly didn't ever censor Shambles - but from the way he screams about censorship, you'd never know it.

Well, I DID delete a few duplicate messages of his, back when he felt honor-bound to post the same thing in three different threads. I guess he still does that, but mostly now he posts and reposts MY words...

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Chris Green
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:57 PM

The coloured messages look very pretty! Well done!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:44 PM

haven't read this for several days, but I do want to assure anyone interested that I am not in cahoots with anyone..*grin*

and Shambles, I don't think I am likely to be censored either, but I'd like to believe that it's my genteel nature and mild manners that keep me safe. I certainly don't think my deep respect and reverential relationship with Joe and Max have anything to do with it.





(is $5 and a six-pack enough, Joe?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:36 PM

As Max appoints the anonymous volunteers and we have no input into any such decision, how is it that we are your problem?

Can you try that one again Jon? I think I may know what you are trying to say here but I would like to be sure - before I try and answer it.


Shambles I am saying that one of your objections is that we have amonymous volunteers performing tasks at Mudcat. We neither appointed those people or set the rule that they should be allowed to perform thier tasks anonymously.

What I want to know from you is how we who had no part in these decisions that have created a system you (not I) object to are the problem. I also want to know why the creator of this part of the system (one I think works well) should not be part of your problem.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:23 PM

As Max appoints the anonymous volunteers and we have no input into any such decision, how is it that we are your problem?

Can you try that one again Jon? I think I may know what you are trying to say here but I would like to be sure - before I try and answer it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:21 PM

Boom!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:19 PM

'800' kinda reminds one of toll-free phone calls!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:19 PM

Such a pleasant number.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:10 PM

Max is not the problem and does not need to be bothered for the solution - we all are the problem

Oh well, back to basics...

Shambles, let's start with this one.

As Max appoints the anonymous volunteers and we have no input into any such decision, how is it that we are your problem?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 07:02 PM

El Greko - or shall we call you Xander? - How about starting another thread where you can create another bogus membership to post and argue with yourself again? That was real fun.

From the following site http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/troyilium/a/taleoftroy_3.htm

Crafty Odysseus devised a plan that ultimately doomed the Trojans. Sending all the Greek ships away or into hiding, it appeared to the Trojans that the Greeks had given up. The great wooden gift the Greeks left before the walls of the city of Troy appeared to be an offering to Athena -- a peace offering. The jubilant Trojans dragged the monstrous, wheeled, wooden horse into their city to celebrate the end of the ten years of fighting.
But beware of Greeks bearing gifts!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 06:10 PM

Wouldn't dare, jeffp


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: jeffp
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 05:17 PM

I doubt that you address and judge Max in the manner you do to me. Or discuss private exchanges publicly like you do with me. Call him names
and question his sanity and invite others to follow your example - so if you make your demand to him - he may answer you.
As I have never done any of these things to you, you are way out of line in accusing me.

As you make no public apology for any of your insulting comments in posts here - I see no reason why I should answer any public demand coming
from you. So I won't - as it is none of your business.
See above

Max is not the problem and does not need to be bothered for the solution - we all are the problem and we all have always had the solution.
So we can take that to mean that you have not taken your concerns to Max?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 05:09 PM

Though three paragraphs just to say "NO" seems a tad wordy.
793 - get ready Leadfingers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 05:08 PM

OK, we have an answer! A resounding "NO"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 05:03 PM

This was the answer that I gave earlier in the thread.

I doubt that you address and judge Max in the manner you do to me. Or discuss private exchanges publicly like you do with me. Call him names and question his sanity and invite others to follow your example - so if you make your demand to him - he may answer you.

As you make no public apology for any of your insulting comments in posts here - I see no reason why I should answer any public demand coming from you. So I won't - as it is none of your business.

Max is not the problem and does not need to be bothered for the solution - we all are the problem and we all have always had the solution.


It is a convention here which I still respect - (even if some other posters here who should know better - do not now appear to respect anything or anyone) - that anything that is said in personal messages - remains private.

So whatever new names can be found to call me and however many HTML variations are used to say it - whatever passes between me and any other party - will remain private. Perhaps this and many other things - can be respected and those that wish to can return to sensible discussion and those that do not - can find another thread to refresh - that interests them more than this one obviously does?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 03:41 PM

Naah, he can't jeffp - he might choke on it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: jeffp
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 03:03 PM

Do you actually think that nothing has happened in the last 5 1/2 years? Where does it say that Roger sets the rules? Again I ask you:

Have you discussed your concerns with Max?
If so, what was his response?
If not, why not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 02:45 PM

I could be wrong – and it may yet happen - but I don't think that any of our volunteers are actually preventing Max from reading and responding to any comments, questions and suggestions posted by the public on the part of his website that he has provided for this……No matter how big or small the lettering or what colour is used – I am quite sure that he will be perfectly able to read anything that anyone has said in this thread – and reply to it – if he wishes to.

However, this is what Max has said.

Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 08:18 AM

Subject: RE: Explain the BS rules
From: Max - PM
Date: 26 Oct 99 - 12:40 AM

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none
.

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=14726&messages=56&page=1&desc=yes


Wesley S came up with the following [posted in the latest 'hug and prayer complaint thread]- it says more in a few lines than I can ever manage, in my long-winded way.

Grant our members and guests the serenity to accept the things they cannot change - the courage to change the things they can - and the wisdom to realise that this is a forum open to the public and that they have no control over the posts and ideas of others


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 12:21 PM

Gone quiet, hasn't it? 787


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Gervase
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 10:48 AM

786!
Fuck me, is this onanistic whingefest still going on?
Hey, Rog, what did Max say?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 10:29 AM

Pink writing is very hard to read too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 10:18 AM

perhaps it needs to be in small brown writing.


Have you discussed your concerns with Max?
If so, what was his response?
If not, why not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 10:14 AM

Roger: "Is it really 'too complicated' to review and finally sort this out - to show equal respect to all contributions? (No, it is not complicated, and Joe has already taken the corrective action, yonks ago)Is not rather that the whole current system too complicated, secretive and divisive?(No, it isn't - by agreement of the majority, you have proved nothing) There is clear evidence that it is not under any effective control and also that those who feel qualified to impose judgement upon their fellow posters do not wish to change anything.(No, there is no satisfactory evidence for your "theory", and it remains an unjustified slander)"

Meanwhile, you bring up the two laughable cases yet once more, instead of answering catspaw's (and ted's and mine) three simple questions.

Perhaps they are not quite so simple for you, then...

"The trick is not to stop the sliding
but to find a graceful way of staying slid".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Same Veteran Member Again
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 10:08 AM

Shambles, I'm not going to read your posts anymore unless they start with "Yes. Max said...."


Have you discussed your concerns with Max?

If so, what was his response?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:51 AM

Roger,
      Thing is, I really don't care too much if I am deleted or not. After all, it's only mudcat, not life and death. If I OWNED MUDCAT, then I would get pissed off. I would also delete all non flamenco players!
             Fox hunting, the true path!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: jeffp
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:43 AM

You are still avoiding the questions Roger


Have you discussed your concerns with Max?
If so, what was his response?
If not, why not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:40 AM

At this rate - you are looking well set for the 800th Ted.

Perhaps a look back again at the evidence at this point would be a good thing - for the benifit of the more recent arrivals to judge.

Without too much effort - there have been two imposed editing actions - that after being brought to light here - have been judged to have been wrong.

1. Flamenco Ted's claim for the 100th post which was deleted (from this thread) by a still anonymous volunteer - when the Chief of the Mudcat Editing team was not even aware that any editing had taken place. This had to be changed back again.

2. And the change imposed by a still anonymous volunteer to the title of a B/s non-music related thread. This had to be re-re-named.

Now you might still think all this does not amount to a bag of beans - (you may not feel like this - if the imposition had been made upon your contributions). Which were in no way abusive (unlike many other posts here - which have been safe from any editing action).

But if bringing these mistakes to public attention is thought to be a fuss about nothing - then in my view - so must the initial imposition and all the factors that lead to this now routine 'tinkering' upon the invited contributions of fellow posters - without their knowledge or agreement?

Is it really 'too complicated' to review and finally sort this out - to show equal respect to all contributions? Is not rather that the whole current system too complicated, secretive and divisive? There is clear evidence that it is not under any effective control and also that those who feel qualified to impose judgement upon their fellow posters do not wish to change anything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:31 AM

Repeating yourself again, Roger - you mentioned the "bogus membership and thread" yersterday again, and you got a response pronto. I don't know about you, but I was taught to be polite and apologise when repeating...*grin*

Yet, while you are repeating yourself tirelessly, the three simple questions of Catspaw still evade you; you claim you have answered them (which you have not, at least not to anyone's satisfaction), but you studiedly refuse to answer them again, even if only to humour catspaw.

Did I say the questions evade you? I meant the reverse of course.

"Slip-sliding away..."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:28 AM

Shambles,
                              Talk to Max. Send him a letter via The Royal Mail, can't fail then!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:26 AM

<b>Like this ft.</b> Anyway shambles seems to be ignoring it. Maybe bigger and red will get his attention...


Shambles

Have you discussed your concerns with Max?
If so, what was his response?
If not, why not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:26 AM

itallics, in red!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Apr 05 - 09:21 AM

Brilliant! Thanks for that, I can SHOUT at people now!


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

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 1 June 4:50 PM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Cafι 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.