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

GUEST,The Shambles 18 Mar 05 - 08:51 AM
Paco Rabanne 18 Mar 05 - 09:01 AM
GUEST,The Shambles 18 Mar 05 - 09:12 AM
Paco Rabanne 18 Mar 05 - 09:29 AM
The Shambles 18 Mar 05 - 09:37 AM
GUEST,Joe Offer 18 Mar 05 - 10:57 AM
GUEST,Flamenco ted 18 Mar 05 - 11:19 AM
GUEST,Joe Offer 18 Mar 05 - 11:28 AM
GUEST,Flamenco ted 18 Mar 05 - 11:48 AM
GUEST,Joe Offer 18 Mar 05 - 12:23 PM
GUEST,brucie 18 Mar 05 - 12:28 PM
GUEST 18 Mar 05 - 12:50 PM
GUEST,brucie 18 Mar 05 - 12:51 PM
GUEST,Giok 18 Mar 05 - 12:56 PM
Raedwulf 18 Mar 05 - 01:49 PM
The Shambles 18 Mar 05 - 02:41 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Mar 05 - 03:35 PM
Peace 18 Mar 05 - 04:27 PM
Raedwulf 18 Mar 05 - 06:51 PM
GUEST,The Shambles 18 Mar 05 - 08:35 PM
Peace 18 Mar 05 - 09:13 PM
Joe Offer 19 Mar 05 - 03:13 AM
The Shambles 19 Mar 05 - 05:17 AM
John MacKenzie 19 Mar 05 - 05:30 AM
GUEST,Jon 19 Mar 05 - 05:40 AM
kendall 19 Mar 05 - 07:41 AM
John MacKenzie 19 Mar 05 - 08:12 AM
Jeri 19 Mar 05 - 08:28 AM
harpgirl 19 Mar 05 - 09:24 AM
kendall 19 Mar 05 - 03:02 PM
Peace 19 Mar 05 - 03:20 PM
catspaw49 19 Mar 05 - 05:12 PM
Peace 19 Mar 05 - 05:18 PM
Georgiansilver 19 Mar 05 - 05:22 PM
Peace 19 Mar 05 - 05:37 PM
Amos 19 Mar 05 - 06:06 PM
Azizi 19 Mar 05 - 08:21 PM
Joe Offer 19 Mar 05 - 10:52 PM
George Papavgeris 19 Mar 05 - 10:55 PM
Peace 20 Mar 05 - 12:53 AM
The Shambles 20 Mar 05 - 06:39 AM
The Shambles 20 Mar 05 - 06:48 AM
The Shambles 20 Mar 05 - 07:19 AM
GUEST,Jon 20 Mar 05 - 07:33 AM
The Shambles 20 Mar 05 - 07:35 AM
GUEST,Jon 20 Mar 05 - 07:41 AM
Azizi 20 Mar 05 - 08:05 AM
John MacKenzie 20 Mar 05 - 09:03 AM
George Papavgeris 20 Mar 05 - 09:07 AM
Joe Offer 20 Mar 05 - 12:20 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 08:51 AM

Pat

"I do not support our forum being shaped by the imposed personal judgements of a few and and deltions and thread closures being based on this."

Well then I'd say you're screwed because that is how these things go!

I think this is one of the saddest and most negative contributions that I have ever read on this forum. It reminds me far too much of the justifications that Bush and Blair are currently giving us – as to why our precious freedoms must be curtailed for the common good and why we must as do as they tell us...For if there are no remaining freedoms – there can be no common good.

Pat, you may be prepared to articulate and accept that there is some sort of inevitable decline into the negative aspects of human nature and that well-intended and very successful attempts to encourage and tolerate the public's freedom of expression – like Max's public discussion forum – are doomed into becoming the private playground of a judgmental and favoured few.

I - and I suspect many other posters do not accept this as inevitable. Things like this fine forum - only go this negative way – if some people wish it to – it suits a few others and the rest do nothing to prevent it. And if you are prepared to let the positive aspects slide and encourage the negative ones.

The contributions of the members you so heartily endorse become nothing but forum killers as the trolls and flamers run amok unchecked. Soon there will be fewer and fewer good memebers until eventually nothing is left but the worst and then, and only then, they too will leave. In their wake they will leave nothing of value.

In truth when those you would judge as 'good members' - currently set and are encouraged to set the example of acting the same and responding in kind to the flamers and trolls – it is difficult to tell them apart……….But this is a public discussion forum. It is not a place for one poster to be encouraged to judge the worth of another poster's entire personality, to call them names and question their possible motives – from only what they may post. It is what is said in the post that matters - and the only choice open to a poster is to reply or not.

You can't see that though can you? You refuse to accept that moderation and censorship becomes needed when forums reach certain levels.

You seem unable to accept the reality of a forum that still remains open to all of the public. Perhaps you should stay in those that are not? Or start one of your own where you could choose and judge your fellow posters? I can accept that some form of moderation may at some point be required but not that this is ever inevitable or when contributions reach a certain level. If this is the case – the reward for the success of Max's public discussion forum – would appear to be that it must die or become something else…………..

I fail to see why you refuse to understand that the limited moderation here is no big deal. We ought to be grateful that this is all there is. But with growth, more will probably become mandatory. Once again, as you have this grand idea of an uncensored forum, please go out and start one. Go for it. Let us know how it goes for you.

But if or when some form of moderation is ever required – I expect you may agree that the requirement is that this moderation it is always open, fair, and has a clear object. That many folk still don't think that any moderation at all is taking place and that it is currently being undertaken and imposed by anonymous fellow posters – rather knocks the first one on the head.   

If it were a matter for me to decide – if or when I thought that imposed censorship was needed on this public discussion forum and that the encouragement of setting a good example and other measures could not deal with any problems – firstly I would consider it to be a BIG DEAL. I would ensure and constantly review that whatever was introduced was open, fair and had a clear object. If or when that is the case on our forum – I will support this……My earler posts in this thread will show who is being most affected by all of this current imposed censorship.

I think the saddest part of your post was how quickly you have given-up on the special place that his forum has always been thought to be. In order - it would appear to support a place that would be as ordinary and intolerant as every other site on the internet. If this part of Max's website - that he set aside for the public's contributions had ever been ordinary - many contrubutors would not have stayed for so long and tried to ensure that it never became ordinary.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 09:01 AM

I've just had my 200th post censored!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 09:12 AM

I've just had my 200th post censored!

I didn't.

Or not yet anyway. Your one must have been judged as offensive subversive and likely to bring the whole edifice down.

There will no doubt be some editorial comment (in brown writing) to explain why your post was deleted.......?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 09:29 AM

I'll tell why my 200th post was deleted, I'll bet Leadfingers complained because he missed it! Typical bamjo player, too slow to catch a cold!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 09:37 AM

As sombody said.........

Well then I'd say you're screwed because that is how these things go!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Joe Offer
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 10:57 AM

Ted, I don't know how to tell you this, but I think Shambles got the 200th post, fair and square. I don't believe there's been a single message deleted or moved from this thread.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Flamenco ted
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:19 AM

Good afternoon Joe,
                  I can't even log in at the moment, but I have DEFINITELY had a few 100th posts deleted today!! How much is Leadfingers paying you?
                   Anyhow, no matter, I have to toddle off to the North York Moors for the weekend. Carry on deleting!
                  Flamenco, the true path!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Joe Offer
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:28 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-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Flamenco ted
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:48 AM

Hang about Joe! If you re read post number 11 and 12 on this very thread, you will see that YOU tried to bag the 100th posts yourself!!! As for the music threads, I see leadfingers trophies are still all over the place. Is it a banjo thing?
Have to go TTFN


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Joe Offer
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 12:23 PM

Hey, Ted - I said the counting messages were a no-no on music threads and serious discussions. Most of us stopped taking the Shambles campaigns seriously a long, long time ago.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 12:28 PM

I find it hard to believe that this thread is still going.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 12:50 PM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 12:51 PM

Y'all take a good look at the post above this one. THAT is censorship. Now, please take two pills and write back in a year. Thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Giok
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 12:56 PM

I am totally pissed off with the whining of 'Shambles', and I'm tempted to tell him where to go, and what to do when he gets there, but that would put me back in the ranks of those who respond to flamers and trolls, and I'm 'Cold Turkey' on that one. Shambles the only thing I can say to you that is polite is "Get a life". You obviously aren't going to get your own way, and you are sulking because someone deleted your pearls of wisdom. Just give it a rest, and if you are that upset, why don't you give the benefit of your erudition and angst to another site, where they will no doubt get as fed up with you as I am.
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Raedwulf
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 01:49 PM

You see Roger? Even Giok's sick of you (mind you, he's a miserable Socts ***)... ;-)

More seriously, you have sidestepped this question twice now. At the third time of asking,

Do you ever stop to wonder why you make so little progress with your arguments, & does it ever occur to you to wonder whether you are out of step with the rest of the board & whether you ought to reconsider your opinions?

Three strikes & yer out, 'ccording to ol' "Blow-job" Clinton...

And Roger, you never responded to my PM. You are avoiding & ignoring my questions. What does that say about you, that would continually question? Are you afraid of giving answers? Or is it only those answers that make you seem a fool that you avoid?

For the benefit of everyone else,

Hello Roger,

Which thread? "Censorship" has grown & I don't have time to wade through it all over again. More than one person has suggested that the Anti-semitism thread was closed because it got too personal, so I'm assuming at this point you're displaying your too well proven 'aversion' & that it's not that one. PM me the thread link & I'll take a look. Be warned though, I'll post my response to you publicly, especially if I think you're talking crap!

Best,

R


Roger won't tell me which thread he thought was particularly censored, same as he won't answer my question. Go figure...

R


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 02:41 PM

Perhaps one of the reasons I did not respond to these PMs is because what is said in these is expected to be personal, to remain private and not be publicly splashed across the forum and there are certain people I felt that could not trust to honour this convention...If so -it looks as if I was right......

BTW someone certainly did delete Flamenco Ted's 200th post. It was there when I first looked and then it was gone............Perhaps the reasons for this imposed judgement upon it, who it was that imposed it and the terrible harm that leaving it in place would have done - will be explained to us in time?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 03:35 PM

Perhaps some peoples habit of intruding into posts they have not made any other contribution to, just to make the 100th/200th/300th post, is regarded as not contributing anything of value to the thread, and a waste of bandwidth. If that is the case then deleting a post that contributes nothing to the sum of Mudcat Knowledge is an act of mercy. It is only done as Joe said above the line, or in the case of BS, where the thread is a serious one. That is something that will only be learned by reading the post in question, if you can't be bothered to do that then your post deserves to be deleted.
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 04:27 PM

Goodnight, Mary Ellen.
Goodnight, Bobbi Jo.
Goodnight, Goodnight, Billy Bob
Goodnight, Susie Des Moines
Goodnight, Al--who the f### is Susie Des Moines?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Raedwulf
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 06:51 PM

Congratulations, Roger. That is the single worst piece of BS I've seen on this board. I asked you that question in private two days ago. You can manage to make public answers to other later responses to your comments, but (somehow) you can't answer the public question I asked twice (you're still weaselling, Roger), you can't even offer me a private acknowledgement (not even an "I don't think it's worth answering") of my PM. And when I ask the same question publicly, you whine & cry.

Why the f*** should anyone respect your 'privacy', when you don't have the 'honour', or the basic common courtesy, to offer even the slightest answer, eh? Your effort at playing 'wronged victim' is pathetic. You could have answered me, given me the chance to look at whatever thread it was that particularly annoying you (& that I would have supported you were you right was as implicit as the fact that I would have criticised you if I thought you were wrong). You didn't. Instead you chose to ignore the PM, yet 'answer' other posts that presumably serve your biased purpose better.

Face it, Roger, nobody but you & the occasional Guest thinks that Mudcat is such a terrible place. You achieve nothing & Mudcat is no 'freer' for your bleating. Until the rules change, I'm afraid you are a particularly worthless whiner. Even Guests are right occasionally. But you, off the subject of PELs...

Bye, bye, Roger...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 08:35 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Bert
Date: 06 Feb 05 - 12:43 AM

The only censorship on Mudcat is to delete deliberate personal attacks. If you are the victim of any other kind of censorship send a PM to Joe, Max, Pene or any of the Joe Clones (even me). I assure you that you will receive a reasoned reply.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, there are a few other things we delete - racism & hate messages, Spam, copy-paste non-music articles that fill more than one screen - I think that about covers it.
-Joe Offer-
[in brown]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
It would appear that it far from covers it.

Posts claiming the 100th etc post in a thread - must be added to the seemingly endless and increasing list of things that must be deleted. Perfectly logical Jim - just look at the damage to the whole fabric of the forum that will be done if these terrible and subversive contributions are allowed by our volunteers to remain.......

Well apart from all that - what else have the Roman's done for us?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 09:13 PM

"Well apart from all that - what else have the Roman's done for us?"

THIS will help.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:13 AM

Well, Ted, I have to admit it - your #200 message was deleted - but there were two botched messages deleted before yours, so you were actually #202....or so.
-Joe Offer-
Here's Ted's (deleted) message:
    Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
    From: flamenco ted - PM
    Date: 18 Mar 05 - 03:59 AM

    200!! Terry, eat my shorts yet again!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:17 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Joe Offer - PM
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:28 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]

The chief of the Mudcat Editorial Staff and the one in charge of our anonymous volunteers actually had no idea if this post had been deleted or not - but decided to present the defence for this imposed action anyway - just in case. But of course these type of routine deletions - because (some) people 'think of them as obnoxious' - are not a BIG DEAL and only considered worth the bother of our lesser anonymous volunteers to delete as a matter of routine in order to protect us.

Whatever one's personal taste in the posts you send or the ones you open and read - I tend to think that anonymous volunteer posters imposing their personal judgement on any of the contributions invited from the public - by Max the site's owner - should always be considered a BIG DEAL.

Perhaps, if or when the intention of the post in question - is clearly NOT offensive and there is no need to rush to protect us - the originator could be contacted - before any judgement is imposed, without their knowledge and possibly against their wishes? This would show the appropriate respect to all the contributions invited by the site's owner for many years and be more in keeping with the tolerant spirit of our forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:30 AM

Tolerance cuts both ways Shambles; you should try it.
Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:40 AM

Here we go again Rambles. Either:

1. Joe and the clones are acting against Max's will (something I do not believe), in which case the question you really need to be asking is why Max allows such a situation to exist.

2. Joe and the clones are acting with Max's will in which case you sould be asking Max why he sets the policy (one I've no objection to) he does.

Until you at least try to make the effort, you will make no sense. This is either a persistant attack on Joe (which I suspect it is) or you have created the fantasy in your own mind that Max is in charge but isn't in charge.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: kendall
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 07:41 AM

Without some control this site could degenerate into just another cesspool of personal attacks, and end up inhabited by nasty people who drive good folks away.
If a handful of assholes lack the wit to temper what they say here, they should be censored.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:12 AM

"A handful of assholes"

I wish you hadn't said that Cap'n, such a nasty image.
Giok ¦¬]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Jeri
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:28 AM

EEeeew!
Sort of an Ed Gien/Buffalo Bob (Silence of the Lambs) thing, idinit?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: harpgirl
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:24 AM

What I find amusing Roger, is that there are a number of people here on the thread who wish to censor you by trying to get you to stop posting about censorship just because they don't like hearing you say the same thing over and over in many different ways and sometimes with a new twist. But you have the right to continue to speak on censorship and I hope you do. Thank god you can speak up. And shame on the people who want to censor you just because you are repetitive and sometimes illogical. It is your right and I am not being sarcastic.


I for one, believe that according to their rules you will not be censored for just being repetitive, but they are tempted! So then you will have demonstrated that censorship at Mudcat occurs when someone feels like it, because they have been annoyed, or because they have arbitrary or misused powers. Sort of like the Bush administration.   

keep speaking up Roger. The world needs people like you.

love, harpgirl


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: kendall
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:02 PM

You are right, Giok, that is not a pretty sight.
Speaking as the target of a recent vicious, sick attack, I have no patience with those who lack impulse control, and combine that with a nasty inarticulate mind.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:20 PM

Different Shit, Same Day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: catspaw49
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:12 PM

From the time we are born we give up freedom and liberty for convenience and safety. How far we are willing to travel the road is the question and this is why Roger that I do not support the Patriot Act and most of the other policies purporting to protect us by Bush and others. But it is silliness to argue the cause of unlimited freedom as you seem to do as NO ONE has it. In "The Political Illusion" Jacques Ellul argues that "The people will fancy an appearance of freedom; Illusion will be their native land."

Most of us assume freedoms that do not actually exist and when confronted with the fact that we must fight for them, stop and take a look at just how important that particular thing is. Now if it is important to you, then the fight and the civil disobedience required is part of the game. Are you saying that you are willing to stand up and fight for a censorless system here?   OR are there some things that YOU feel need censored?

Max has continually approved the work of Joe and The Clones and when he hasn't or has had a question, it seems as though they handled it themselves. Are you saying you want to be privvy to this? Seems to me we are ALL privvy to this because Joe and The Clones have kept right on during the YEARS you have been harping away! This should be evidence to you but I guess it isn't. How about if Max sends you a note that says, "I approve the way it is! Now shut the fuck up!"....Would that do it? Re-read Jon's comments above as I think he may have it right...............

But listen, if you think we should be censor free......Tell Joe that is the way YOU want THIS THREAD to be and I'll back you up. Then, I guess we can start playing The Dozens huh?

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:18 PM

I come back to this thread regularly in hope there will be new light shed on censorship. There isn't. Keriste, Roger, if you can't change the tune will you at least change the chords?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:22 PM

Gets better and better!......beware! Whenever you give an opinion on censorship, it sort of gives something away about you!....Is this the end of the thread or does it carry on indefinitely?
Best wishes, Mike.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:37 PM

If it carries on indefinitely, it woill becaome more difficult to access. So, if it's a vote, I go fer indefinitely.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Amos
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:06 PM

Harpgirl:

I don't think anyone should have the right to make Shambles "Shuddup awready!". I do wish someone could persuade him to, though.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:21 PM

Shambles, you have made your point over and over and over again.
We've read it and most don't agree.

And who cares whether we agree or not..It's not our website.

Mudcat it owned by Max, right? If he doesn't agree with your position, then it seems to me that it's time for you to accept the fact. You've made your position known-as is your right-and it appears that Max doesn't buy it.

Shambles, I respect the fact that you are exercising your right to make known your discontent about what you see are problems here. And I do believe you are well meaning.

Outside of Mudcat, you may already be an advocate for other causes that have the goal of making the world a better place. If so, I applaud you.

May I suggest that you take some of the energy that you are expending fighting this cause of censorship on Mudcat and
re-direct taht energy to those other causes?

Best wishes,
Azizi


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 10:52 PM

Well, the irony of it all is that Shambles has never been censored. He has always been allowed to say exactly what he wants to say. Now, I will admit that we have sometimes thwarted his desire to post multiple copies of the same message in multiple threads, and we have combined threads when he has see fit to start multiple threads on the same subject - but at least one copy of every word Shambles has written remains posted here at Mudcat.

Many of us have strongly disagreed with Shambles, but I don't think that's censorship. In fact, it would be censorship if we were not allowed to disagree.

So, the only personal effect that "censorship" has had on Shambles is that he has not been allowed to post multiple copies of posts.

Poor Shambles.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 19 Mar 05 - 10:55 PM

When I was barely a teenager, there was a local "village fool" in our neighbourhood. Everyone knew his "buttons": If you mentioned the name of a well-known actress, he would drool; and if you mentioned the word "knife" he would swear uncontrollably.

The poor guy could hardly make ten steps on the street before a kid, or - just as often - a grownup, would shout either or both "buttons", just to witness his inevitable reactions for the umpteenth time.

With April Fool's Day looming, I have an idea......:-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Peace
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 12:53 AM

This is gonna be fun.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 06:39 AM

I don't think anyone should have the right to make Shambles "Shuddup awready!". I do wish someone could persuade him to, though.

I've always been a man that's open to ----persuasion. Perhaps this could be tried?

I fail to see why 'shutting me up' should appear to matter, so much to so many. For no one is imposing my view upon anyone else - against their will or forcing anyone to see it my way - if you don't open this thread or close any other thread imediately you see a post from me there - that problem is easily solved....

The wisdom or need for anonymous volunteer posters passing their personal judgement on the worth of another poster's contributions and deleting it or closing entire threads - if and when they feel like it - without the posters prior knowledge and on all occasions - remains to be addressed or debated.

Does it really have to be as unpleasant as all this bullying? If censorship or moderation MUST NOW take place on our forum (and expect to be generally supported) - should it not be OPEN, FAIR AND HAVE A CLEAR OBJECTIVE?

In all honesty - can this current practice be defended as being OPEN, FAIR AND HAVING A CLEAR OBJECTIVE?

Is it really SO good that any positive suggestions as to how effectiveness and support can be improved - must be met with sarcasm (and worse) from our volunteers and their supporters?

Anyone who may be in agreement with me that things need to be improved - is hardly likely to be prepared to post publicly to say this and subject themselves to this treatment - are they?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 06:48 AM

We've read it and most don't agree.

Perhaps most of those who are prepared to post to say this - are anonymous volunteers themselves?

Turkeys voting for Christmas?

Not that anyone here has a vote.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:19 AM

And who cares whether we agree or not..It's not our website.

This is part of Max's website that he has provided for all of us for open public discussion. So in that sense, although the website is Max's – the forum is ours. His stated role in this is only to "facilitate"

From: Max - PM
Date: 10 Mar 00 - 12:54 AM

OK, gargoyle, you got it. I tried to give your membership back months ago, but you apparently never got my message. Your tactics are crude, you are often inappropriate and rude, and I obviously cannot ever agree with you for the simple fear that anyone would think that your type of efforts could or should be effective, but you are undoubtedly a knowledgeable member of our community. My motive for your membership? People want to be able to talk to you… and as ambiguous as I may seem here, my sole function is to facilitate that… because that is what The Mudcat is all about
.

May as well wheel this quote out again. With apologies to those who may have read before.

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.


These quotes are from the time where it was accepted that 'all animals were equal' on our forum. Now that some animals appear to have taken over the farmyard - make their own rules and now declare that 'some animals are more equal than others' – to anonymously impose their judgement upon and delete the contributions of others - perhaps a review is in order?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:33 AM

Good grief Shambles, perhaps you genuinely are insane.

"Now that some animals appear to have taken over the farmyard - make their own rules and now declare that 'some animals are more equal than others"

How did they achieve this? Did they blackmail Max? Have they got him tied and gagged somewhere? Did they hack thier way into his computer?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:35 AM

Perhaps Max will explain?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:41 AM

"Perhaps Max will explain?"

At long last some progress has been made. Please do what I suggested before and ask him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Azizi
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 08:05 AM

Shambles,
with regard to your post dated 20 Mar 05 - 06:48 AM that
quotes a comment that I had made earlier:

"We've read it [your complaints]and most don't agree."

In response to this you wrote:

"Perhaps most of those who are prepared to post to say this - are anonymous volunteers themselves? "

Well, you probably were not directing that comment to me, but just for the record let me say that I may be anonymous and I have done some volunteering for various efforts that I believe in. But if you are referring to my serving as an assistant to Joe Offer, nope that ain't me..I'm just a new kid on the block. {Well I'm not a 'kid' anymore, but the rest of my comment is the God's honest truth.}

I must say Shambles that I like the creativity of your comment "Turkeys voting for Christmas"

I hereby give you notice that I intend to borrow that phrase, but change the holiday to Thanksgiving. In so doing that would give the comment more USA cultural punch!!

Shambles, it seems you're on a mission, and no one and nothing will deter you from 'doin your thing'. Since this is a 'free country', and a free online community, I support your right to fuss.

But I thank God that no one is FORCING me to read your remarks.
That would truly be cause for concern.


Azizi


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 09:03 AM

Well we all know what is left on the ground in that farmyard when the animals are let out. Now unless you're into arse watching, you can't always tell which animal produced which shit, but the worst thing you can do in these circumstances, is add to the pile.
Giok ¦¬]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 09:07 AM

12 - I have given fair warning


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: Joe Offer
Date: 20 Mar 05 - 12:20 PM

El Greko, what are you counting? - the number of times Shambles quoted Max's "Don't sweat the rules" statement? I think it's 14, not counting the number of times he quoted it in the Help Forum. That guy is a copy-paste whiz, isn't he?
-Joe Offer-


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

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 28 May 9:35 AM 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.