There was no thread. Una never wrote the article. There is no publication called the Sunday Tribune. Pilchard does not exist. What's an MCD? This is how things have always been, I have no idea what you people are talking about.

can everyone chill out please? Look, there's just some stuff going on my end about the article at the moment, and maybe it would be better for Cluas if it wasn't on the site for the time being. But hey, if you want to put if up again, do so. People throwing around theories about the why and the how aren't doing much justice to the rational. I've stated my position to Eoghan in confidence, and there's nothing more to say about it really. Pilchard, of course I stand over the article.

Serenity now..........(In the tone of Father Dougal McGuire)

i for one am very angry about something, and i feel i should tell you all about how i feel in this confusing instance. for example, with all due respect, whats going on? me not knowing whats happening at the moment is quiet a serious development, and god damn, i feel like venting my frustrations by pointing the finger at stuff. you there! its your fault i say! ya.

I know I am only new and judt passing through but from what I see - I am sure that whatever reason this is being done is for the good of the forum. I agree that it probably is frustrating and also that people might have a fear of being censored which if this happened regularly might be something to worry but that it is not the case. Una puts alot of post up here and seems a key contributor to cluas so I am sure she has the best interests of the forum and her forum friends at heart. Everything will come out in the wash it always does and sure when you meet the people in person around town it gives ya something good and meaty to gossip about. Once again I know nothing but just felt like giving an outsider view.

So basically admin was talking crap when they said 'Motivation to delete it is realated to its reproduction of copyrighted material ' That was clearly a lie as it turns out Una asked for it to be removed. So what is the stance then admin? Does a single request from one user result in a change of policy along with some horses**t about copyright? Its not for the good of the forum, if it was, there would be no reason to lie about it. Lesson for today is never, ever, say what you plan to write about on a public forum and don't piss off mcd.

thats a very good point nerraw, i hadnt thought of it like that does this mean we can all request threads to be deleted if we dont like the way we came across on them or if what we said has pissed someone off? does this mean there is one rule for newspaper journalists who post here like una and one for the rest of us? it certainly makes me, for one, look at Cluas in a different light and i would think others share this view from what has been written in this thread

We're all equal. But some of us are more equal than others. Now Admin, delete this thread please.

Jeez people, can we lighten up and take a step back here!? I'm a moderator here and also do not know the ins and outs as to why this thread was deleted. However, it is clear that there are real world reasons (where peoples' jobs and livlihoods are impacted) why the request was made. I mean c'mon, what would you have us do? The moderators here are not some class of 1950's McCarthy-ite cabal conspiring to impose on the forum.

the problem with trying to lighten up and forget about this and all of that is that kind of behaviour is just what Cluas and other online communities attack offline publications and magazines about. how many times have we criticised various journalists here for not writing about certain issues or covering up various carry ons? But when Cluas changes the rules and tries to laugh it off, we're expected to go back to talking about Radiohead or inexcusable music (many might think they're one and same) and forget all about it. if theres a problem with writing about CDM (how did that happen? i wrote DCM, there u go, it happened again), do as Thumped or Boards did and ban ALL mentions of them and their concerts, as well as prohibiting their employees from using the board to plug their shows. if not, let the thread stand. once u post here, u need to be able to stand over it, just as u would a brilliant, insightful and well-written full-page piece in the Sunday Tribune. maybe delete your own comments (which the forum set-up currently allows) but the thread should stand.

MCD thread was a very interesting discussion. just remove the comments posted by the person who requested it. That's the good thing about Cluas, well informed people (excluding me) debating issues that offline publications won't or don't touch on.

Let's boil this down to the facts: 1) Pilchard starts a thread. He labels it "Una vs. MCD" (which BTW is a label it could be argued would give some people the mistaken impression that an individual is "out to get" an organisation or taking a David'n'Goliath stand, but I'm not going to go down that path). 2) Into the thread Pilchard copy'n'pasted copyrighted material without permission of the copyright holder. We did not (and do not) ban this sort of thing on CLUAS but the unarguable fact is – despite claims by some in this thread to the contrary – this material was and remains copyrighted, and copyright restricts what you can do with the copyrighted material. 3) Una asks me / the moderating team that the thread is removed without stating a reason as to why she wants it removed. 4) I (and the other moderators) do not seek from Una a reason as to why it is to be removed, we know her and trust her judgment and – being aware of the facts (I repeat: facts) that the thread related to her livelihood, was explicitly tied to her personally and professionally, and involved the copy'n'pasting of copyrighted material – her request was therefore respected and the thread deleted. 5) I made the assumption – which was based on a factual observation on my part but was not checked with Una prior to the deletion – that the request to delete was motivated (among other possible reasons) by the reproduction of copyrighted material she had written for her employer (the copyright holder). I may have been wrong to make that leap, but in the bigger scheme of things it really doesn't matter. I am not losing sleep over it. As I said before, life is too short. 6) We could have deleted it and said nothing and hoped that maybe no one would have noticed (the thread after all had no new additions to it for a day or so), but that's not the way I like to do things around here. 7) Instead as a matter of courtesy I immediately sent an email to Pilchard telling him that the thread he started was deleted and giving the reason for the deletion as reproduction of copyrighted material. 8) Pilchard asked me to bring this to the attention of the board as others contributed to the thread. I gladly agreed to his request and immediately initiated this thread. 9) Una subsequently discussed the matter in confidence with me and I remain happy that the steps we took were appropriate and were not heavy-handed. Points: • To imply that CLUAS is pursuing a cover up here (as Pilchard did above in his posting of this morning) tickled my Python-esque funny bone. There. Is. Obviously. No. Cover. Up. But I think the vast majority of members have realised that by now. • On CLUAS there is no "problem with writing about" MCD (as Pilchard chose to put it). Or to be more precise the CLUAS Moderating team does not have a problem with such writing on the board. A case in point is this recent thread on which there have to date been 71 replies and which – wait for it – the Moderating team hasn’t deleted: http://www.CLUAS.com/discussion/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7512 • Postings relating to MCD will be of course be watched by the moderating team. But – hey - that's no news, because the moderating team watches every single message posted here on every single topic. • Pilchard above asks why don't we "do as Thumped or Boards did and ban ALL mentions of them and their concerts". On that suggestion I have only one observation – by banning all mentions of any organisation on a discussion board you (obviously) ban all discussion of them. So if anyone is advocating that such a step be taken they are expressing a preference for censoring themselves! I therefore think it a bit unusual that Pilchard (and others) are directing such energies in this thread because discussion of MCD is not banned on this board. • If anyone asks the moderating team to delete a thread they did or did not start the request will be judged on its merits and deleted if found by the moderators to be an appropriate request. • We on CLUAS are not in the game of trying to please all of the people all of the time. Nor do we ever plan to be. • Pilchard says "the thread should stand". The moderating team says no it shouldn't and it was deleted. I think it's time to agree to disagree. • An effective way to influence the moderating team, how it operates and the standards it adheres to is to become a member of the moderating team… • …which reminds me Pilchard, I invited you to become a Moderator twice in February 2005 but you turned down my invite. Eoghan <concluding note> I am not going to contribute any more to this thread – and my silence is not to be interpreted as "proof" of some (cough, splutter) "cover up". My points have been made and I have spent enough time on this already. I don't want to sound condescending but I have better things to be doing with my time (like organizing the CLUAS benefit gig for Aware taking place in Whelan's in September (details coming soon), like publishing new content to the site that accumulated during my recent holiday, like learning my lines for the play I'm appearing in the week after next, like hoovering the gaff, like earning a living, etc) </concluding note>

oooooooh, there i have been told there is SO much in eoghans post that i want to respond to but, like him, i just dont have the time so i'm not going to keep this going. life is indeed short however, i will respond to one bitchy, catty and pointlessly childish point made by Eoghan, the person who started and maintains this site. Thats the question of me saying no when I was aked to be a site moderator. What the hell does me kindly and politely declining the job of moderator have to do with this topic? does me politely saying no to becoming a cluas moderator mean it will be dragged out every time i get involved in asking questions about cluas policy? its the kind of catty ya-boo-sucks comment you'd hear on a primary school playground. Which I suppose is what many people think cluas can sometimes be..... an apology and an explanation for this ridiculous comment would be appreciated

I cant believe that this topic keeps running. Firstly, may I direct your attention to the following link http://www.cluas.com/discussion/faq.asp which states clearly that, "No one else can edit your post, except for the forum Moderator or the forum Administrator. A note is generated at the bottom of each edited post displaying when and by whom the post was edited." when you sign up to the forum, you agree to this condition; and edit also means delete by the way, because if we weren't allowed to do it as moderators then we wouldn't be gvien the facility to do so. Secondly, Pilchard, lets go back to first principles, you posted someone else's words up on the forum under your own name not as a quotation to back up something you were writing but as a complete piece, when this person requested that they would like their own words to be deleted, you got up on your high horse, had a tantrum and started flinging around a bunch of, frankly, spurious claims regarding freedom of speech, censorship etc. Its pretty rich when you didn't write the words to begin with. As far as I can see, Una has a say in how HER words are used, but you have no such rights in regard to HER words and, in my opinion, did not have any mandate to either post them up or demand to keep them up. Now drop it. One more thing, with regard to 'censorship', posters on the cluas discussion board have far more freedom and latitude then people who write letters in to newspapers for publication. The chances of their letters being published lie solely with the editor and the letters are by and large heavily edited for space or to remove phrases or sentences that would pose legal problems.

my last words on this because we're now talking in circles. i think this whole fandago has weakened cluas's ability to be able to debate and discuss what goes on in the irish music scene and industry. the amount of scurrying back and forth which has gone on, the number and variety of excuses used and the slightly hectoring and bullying tone taken by Rev Jules and Eoghan towards valid questions would indicate that Cluas is best when discussing Damien Rice and The Frames rather than an issue like this. As per Una's request, I would like to ask the moderator to delete ALL my mails on the Cluas bulletin board. There are 662 of them - damn, nearly made it to the number of the beast as well.