Czarcasm, Giraffe, is this a new pit policy?

[Weirddave]

I have noticed this a couple of times in the past month or so, specifically in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=324192) and this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=318321). In both cases, the OP started a pit thread about a topic, and it turned out that the vast majority of people responding did not agree with them. They then requested the thread to be closed, which it was. When did this policy come into effect? In all the years I've been here, it's always been the case that if you started a pit thread about an asinine subject, you had to take your lumps as other dopers pointed the flaws of your reasoning out to you, often with cruelty and malice aforethought. WTF, guys? Has the pit been dampened down so much that posters are now immune from having to answer for their words? If I were to post a thread saying, oh, I dunno, that I thought Howard Dean was a lunatic, I expect that I'd be gently chastised by a lot of people for having that opinion, which is how it should be. Why are you guys letting people off the hook like this? Shouldn't we all be required to stand behind what we say and either defend it against all comers or admit our mistakes if convinced to do so by the madding crowd?

[Frank]

WeirdDave and I agree on something. Apocalypse at eleven.

I thought the very same thing when I saw Cartooniverse's thead had been closed at his request. Actually, my thought was "wimp." I'm surprised it was closed, and disappointed in Czarcasm.

[Harborwolf]

The rule itself has been around for as long as I can remember.

It's kinda one o'them fluffy rules.. If the OP really steps out of line, the mods will let them take their lumps for a while. They will also leave it open if the discussion has some merit or has gone beyond the op. If it's causing more harm than good or if it simply isn't going anywhere, closed it gets.

In the examples you have, one thread wasn't really getting much in the way of legs (cartooniverse). The other was really upsetting the op (spongemom). That one was best put out of it's misery.

[belladonna]

Agreed that this policy, if that's what it is, sucks. It's bad enough that people feel entitled to a closure because they're getting their ass rightfully handed to them, but even worse is that these requests are honored instead of being met with raised eyebrows and hysterical laughter.
Boo.

[Harborwolf]

Agreed that this policy, if that's what it is, sucks. It's bad enough that people feel entitled to a closure because they're getting their ass rightfully handed to them, but even worse is that these requests are honored instead of being met with raised eyebrows and hysterical laughter.
Boo.

If someone deserves to get their ass handed to them, most time the mods will let it take place. Nobody was handing anyone their ass in the mason thread, and the cat thread was just ugly. Not one of the boards finer moments imho. As spongemom really seemed to be getting upset (not to mention getting the shit kicked out of her when she was down) I am glad the mods shut it down.

[silenus]

After a certain point, a lesson stops being taught. Then the pile-on is for the jollies of the pile-ees, not the education of the pile-or. It's a judgement call, but one I'm willing to let happen at the discretion of the mods.

[UrbanChic]

I hear ya, Weirddave. I remember a number of threads wherein the OP requested to have it closed only to have a mod deny it on the grounds that you opened this can of worms so now you have to deal with it.

[SisterCoyote]

In the case of the spongemom thread, several posters had said that she ought to ask to have the thread closed; I would guess (though I certainly don't know being as IANAM, IHNBAM and other acronyms) that such commentary had an effect on the mods' decision.

[The King of Soup]

I'm of two minds about this. On one hand, I'm generally well-disposed to Cartooniverse, based on reading his posts, and I was afraid that his thread would soon devolve into the kind of animosity that could do real damage, and I wasn't looking forward to it. On the other, I suspect that this is the kind of moderator decision that will hurt the community in the long run. Here's why:

1) The nature of the OP. It wasn't of the same class as "I hate puppies, how about you?" or "Facial hair is disgusting" or even "The King of Soup hates America." It made a public, ugly accusation against a large group of people and their organization, an organization with which several in this community proclaim some affiliation, and to which other members may well belong. Moreover, the purpose of the OP was not to support the accusation, but to solicit anecdotal support for it from others, which is kind of like raising your sail and asking the bystanders on shore to blow in your direction.

2) In spite of this, the train not only had not wrecked, it was sitting as prettily on the tracks as could be expected, especially for the forum. The OP was being treated extremely gently. Those who could give solid information in support did so, those whose experience did not support the OP supplied their thoughts in an admirably nonconfrontational way, and most of the rest of us asked questions and raised objections respectfully and honestly.

3) The OP never appeared again. Thread closed. Period.

Here's why I'm upset. If we can make accusations of pedophilia (or anything else) against whole groups of unnamed (but hardly nameless) people on the basis of evidence we hope to borrow from strangers on the internet, and then be allowed to test the winds, find them unfavorable, and simply walk away from them, without either substantiating or recanting them, this board could rapidly get so ugly that the worst pile-on in Pit history would look like a collection of fan letters by comparison. If you make an accusation on this board, your options should be as follows: (a) prove it, (b) retract it, (c) take your lumps. That's not to say the moderators shouldn't ever close these threads. But I think it unwise to close one at the OP's request without any of those things happening. Our best protection against the worst abuses of a message board (and I'm not talking about Cartooniverse, here) is not the moderators, it's us, using our ability to question and compile facts and sometimes let an OP or other poster have it with both barrels. That got taken away this time.

Which brings up another dilemma. Presumably anyone so inclined (I'm not) could open up a Pit thread to tell Cartooniverse what he wanted to say in the closed thread. But if I were so inclined, I'd hesitate while I thought about what it meant that a thread which merely threatened to become an avenue for attacking him was closed even before any attacks took place. I'd look at all the threads in which an OP got into trouble and was pilloried without intervention, at least for a while.

So in my opinion, this closing can do nothing except embolden those who would make loud unsubstantiated accusations and have a chilling effect on anyone who might be inclined to respond.

[Miller]

I agree with the OP on both counts. A little less so on the Spongemom thread, where it could be argued that the mods had decided that she'd already had enough of a beating. I disagree, but that's because I'm an angry, spiteful little man who enjoys watching others suffer. I'd've let it run to ten pages, minimum.

The Cartooniverse one should not have been closed, though. He made some pretty harsh accusations, then just cut and ran when it didn't go the way he'd apparently hoped. I'm no fan of the Masons: in fact, I think it's just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard of, but accusing the entire organization of being a pedophilia ring is just a tidge over the top. He should have been made to either defend his OP, retract it, or take his lumps like a man.

[Bippy the Beardless]

I agree with closing Spongemom's thread, as the thread had nowhere else to go, and had said everything it could say. But Cartooniverse's thread was closed too early, it was like me starting a thread to say Cecil is a kiddy fiddler, then refusing to give cites and asking for the thread to be closed without withdrawing or backing up my accusation. I would ecxpect a warning at least not to make accusations that I am not willing or able to back up.
Of course if I said I had seen Cecil playing violin at an early age, that would be fine, my evidence would be week, and I should be expected to give details of where and when I saw the action, it would still be an accusation based on flimsy evidence and so OK. But to make an accusation and then refuse to give any evidence at all that points to the validity of the accusation is wrong and should be called to account.

[Liz]

While I don't generally support vicious pile-ons, I would have liked to hear Cartooniverse's explanation about the pedophilia accusation. That's a serious charge to levy at a group, only to not bring forth relevant information. Perhaps he realized he was getting a bit out of line with his accusations and cooled down a bit -- a very good thing, but I wish he could have stated that before having it closed. I think a brief few lines explaining that would have served better than an abrupt closure of the thread, especially since there was no real flaming going on.

As for the second thread held up for evidence, I agree with that lock. It was just getting nasty.

[Nic2004]

I just read the link to the Spongemom thread and I'm sorry I did. I cannot believe the nasty and hateful messages posted here against a woman in grief. I had thought better of the posters here. Regardless of my feelings on the subject of free-roaming cats, the insensitivity and bashing here were deplorable. My highest regards to Left Hand of Dorkness and the few, very few, reasonable and moderated voices there. I am your newest fan.
Regardless of your motivation, the pains caused there were unnecessary and will never be forgotten.

[minty green]

It may be relevant to note that Cartooniverse (IIRC) adopted, several years ago, a personal policy of nonparticipation in Pit threads. His thread was originally opened in IMHO, and moved to the Pit by moderator action. Since he can't/won't participate in a Pit thread, it was probably sensible to close it. Likewise, you can probably expect that there won't be any response from him in this thread.

Obviously, I am neither Cartooniverse nor a mod. Just making an observation, is all.

[Tuckerfan]

I hear ya, Weirddave. I remember a number of threads wherein the OP requested to have it closed only to have a mod deny it on the grounds that you opened this can of worms so now you have to deal with it.
Who was it who had the sig line quoting Coldy saying, "I ain't moving shit." in response to december's request to move a thread from the Pit to GD where he thought it belonged?

[Ferret Herder]

While I don't generally support vicious pile-ons, I would have liked to hear Cartooniverse's explanation about the pedophilia accusation. That's a serious charge to levy at a group, only to not bring forth relevant information. Perhaps he realized he was getting a bit out of line with his accusations and cooled down a bit -- a very good thing, but I wish he could have stated that before having it closed. I think a brief few lines explaining that would have served better than an abrupt closure of the thread, especially since there was no real flaming going on.
I agree with your post in general, but I wanted to also add that it might have taken a few days for various Mason-involved board members to find their way over to the thread and give their input, so leaving it open for longer might actually have been productive.

[Liz]

A quick perusal of his posting history proves you right, minty; he doesn't post in the Pit.

Thanks, that was helpful.

[Fionn]

WeirdDave

I thought the very same thing when I saw Cartooniverse's thead had been closed at his request. Actually, my thought was "wimp."

I had much the same reaction, though my version was "Chickenshit."

My reaction remains the same upon the reminder that Cartooniverse apparently won't post in the Pit even in a thread he started.

[TVeblen]

It may be relevant to note that Cartooniverse (IIRC) adopted, several years ago, a personal policy of nonparticipation in Pit threads. His thread was originally opened in IMHO, and moved to the Pit by moderator action. Since he can't/won't participate in a Pit thread, it was probably sensible to close it. Likewise, you can probably expect that there won't be any response from him in this thread.




There hasn't been a change in procedure. This was an usual situation, as Minty noted. 'Toon doesn't post in the Pit, which Czarcasm, not being a Pit mod, didn't realize when he moved the thread.

Nothing new or major went on. Just a stray hiccup.

Veb

[fruitbat]

I just read the link to the Spongemom thread and I'm sorry I did. I cannot believe the nasty and hateful messages posted here against a woman in grief. I had thought better of the posters here. Regardless of my feelings on the subject of free-roaming cats, the insensitivity and bashing here were deplorable. My highest regards to Left Hand of Dorkness and the few, very few, reasonable and moderated voices there. I am your newest fan.
Regardless of your motivation, the pains caused there were unnecessary and will never be forgotten.


In a way this proves the point. I really really really think you are wrong. Her behavior as recorded in that thread was despicable, her attitude was terrible, and she was a lunatic. I would have been pleased to debate that point with anyone who disagreed.

On the other hand maybe things would have turned around for her. Either way the thread would have died a natural death, which is always more satisfying than a mod mercy killing.

[Giraffe]

It may be relevant to note that Cartooniverse (IIRC) adopted, several years ago, a personal policy of nonparticipation in Pit threads. His thread was originally opened in IMHO, and moved to the Pit by moderator action. Since he can't/won't participate in a Pit thread, it was probably sensible to close it. Likewise, you can probably expect that there won't be any response from him in this thread.This is correct. I don't know the details of Cartooniverse's anti-Pit policy, but I do believe the guilt of having moved Cartooniverse's thread to a forum he was sworn not to visit ate away at Czarcasm until he was near the brink of madness and despair. I'm pretty sure he cried, too.

Me, I closed Spongemom's thread because I'm mean and don't want anyone to have any fun. Instead, I taunted her myself on email for the rest of the day while dressing up in a variety of sexy, sexy outfits. I don't know if she cried -- I was too busy singing along with my Celine Dion album.

In general, there's no policy by which threads are closed at the request of the OP. It's all up to our notoriously fickle whims. Sometimes, we not only leave the thread open but change the OP's username and reset their post count back to zero.

[Czarcasm]

There hasn't been a change in procedure. This was an usual situation, as Minty noted. 'Toon doesn't post in the Pit, which Czarcasm, not being a Pit mod, didn't realize when he moved the thread.

Nothing new or major went on. Just a stray hiccup.

Veb
Sorry I took so long to respond, but work beckoned me.
Minty got it right on the nose. The thread was started in IMHO, and I felt tht it was more of a BBQ Pit-type thread, so I moved it. Cartooniverse e-mailed me and told me of his self-imposed exile from the Pit, and asked me to close the thread, which I did. As TVeblen said, I just didn't know about this particular Pit situation.

[Czarcasm]

BTW, I wasn't crying-there was something in my eye.

[Spectre of Pithecanthropus]

If someone deserves to get their ass handed to them, most time the mods will let it take place. Nobody was handing anyone their ass in the mason thread, and the cat thread was just ugly. Not one of the boards finer moments imho. As spongemom really seemed to be getting upset (not to mention getting the shit kicked out of her when she was down) I am glad the mods shut it down.

I concur...let the OP receive a few kicks to the ass if warranted, but there's no conceivable reason to leave it open long enough for every Doper under the sun to pitch in.

[Weirddave]

Sorry I took so long to respond, but work beckoned me.
Minty got it right on the nose. The thread was started in IMHO, and I felt tht it was more of a BBQ Pit-type thread, so I moved it. Cartooniverse e-mailed me and told me of his self-imposed exile from the Pit, and asked me to close the thread, which I did. As TVeblen said, I just didn't know about this particular Pit situation.
Well, that is certainly clearer, but is it wise to have an exception to board policy for just one individual? If the thread was pit worthy, than it was pit worthy. As it stands we have an 800lb gorilla in the room that not only is nobody addressing, we can't even admit that it exists. Cartooniverse has levied some pretty heavy charges of pedophilia with no evidence against an organization that is (as far as anyone knows) innocent of those charges, and now there is no place to discuss them because he is disinclined to post in the pit??? Are you serious? Opening another thread to discuss the closed one would be against board rules as well. Tell me, if Cartooniverse were to say or do something that I found offensive, would any pit thread I started to deal with the situation be closed just because "oh, he doesn't post in the pit"? What kind of bullshit double standard is that? Well, if that's the way the game is played...

From here on out I am adopting a policy of not posting in response to any posts that insult to deride me or my positions. Since that policy makes me unable to respond to any criticism, I expect that any and all threads where I am criticized shall be closed forthwith by the moderators once I report them, as my new policy means that I am unable to respond to such insults and accusations. In fact, I might suggest a sticky thread be placed in the pit to give me a prominent forum for listing those threads that displease me, making it easier for the moderators to give me special treatment. Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter. :rolleyes:

[Metacom]

Well, if you're so hot on the topic, Weirddave, what's stopping you from pitting Cartooniverse and discussing whether the Masons are pedophiles in there? Or even starting a GD thread on DeMolay?

[Giraffe]

Well, that is certainly clearer, but is it wise to have an exception to board policy for just one individual? If the thread was pit worthy, than it was pit worthy. As it stands we have an 800lb gorilla in the room that not only is nobody addressing, we can't even admit that it exists. Cartooniverse has levied some pretty heavy charges of pedophilia with no evidence against an organization that is (as far as anyone knows) innocent of those charges, and now there is no place to discuss them because he is disinclined to post in the pit??? Are you serious? Opening another thread to discuss the closed one would be against board rules as well. Tell me, if Cartooniverse were to say or do something that I found offensive, would any pit thread I started to deal with the situation be closed just because "oh, he doesn't post in the pit"? What kind of bullshit double standard is that? Well, if that's the way the game is played...

From here on out I am adopting a policy of not posting in response to any posts that insult to deride me or my positions. Since that policy makes me unable to respond to any criticism, I expect that any and all threads where I am criticized shall be closed forthwith by the moderators once I report them, as my new policy means that I am unable to respond to such insults and accusations. In fact, I might suggest a sticky thread be placed in the pit to give me a prominent forum for listing those threads that displease me, making it easier for the moderators to give me special treatment. Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter. :rolleyes:A few points:

1. Go ahead and Pit Cartooniverse, if you want to. Sure, he won't read it, but that can be true of any poster, as there is no rule that requires a poster to read and/or post in the Pit.

2. Czarcasm decided to close that thread because it seemed like the right thing to do in this specific situation. It's not a new loophole in board policy. If this was part of a larger pattern of hit-and-run Pit threads by Cartooniverse, you might have a point. But there isn't, so you don't.

3. Stop being a melodramatic douchebag.

[Weirddave]

A few points:

1. Go ahead and Pit Cartooniverse, if you want to. Sure, he won't read it, but that can be true of any poster, as there is no rule that requires a poster to read and/or post in the Pit.

2. Czarcasm decided to close that thread because it seemed like the right thing to do in this specific situation. It's not a new loophole in board policy. If this was part of a larger pattern of hit-and-run Pit threads by Cartooniverse, you might have a point. But there isn't, so you don't.

3. Stop being a melodramatic douchebag.
1. Why should I pit Cartooniverse? If I felt he did something pit worthy, I'll pit him. I haven't seen anything. Frankly, I wasn't given a chance to decide if he was doing anything pit worthy because his thread was closed before more facts could develop

2. Fine, he made a decision. I realize that. I even pointed it out. I think it was a very poor decision, and that he didn't think of the ramifications of what he was doing. All I would like is for you to admit that a: Making an exception to board policy was a mistake and it won't happen again or b: Cartooniverse is now immune from responsibility for what he says, because anything he posts that is pit worthy will be closed instead of moved to the pit where it belongs. Which is fine, if that's the policy you want to make, then make it but at least have the balls to own up to it instead of prevaricating all over the place.

3. Hyperbole is exaggeration for effect. Melodrama is a literary device. Please tell me what it is about my last paragraph that is substantially different from how you are treating Cartooniverse, hyperbole aside.

[Giraffe]

1. Why should I pit Cartooniverse? If I felt he did something pit worthy, I'll pit him. I haven't seen anything. Frankly, I wasn't given a chance to decide if he was doing anything pit worthy because his thread was closed before more facts could developI was addressing your comment here:
Tell me, if Cartooniverse were to say or do something that I found offensive, would any pit thread I started to deal with the situation be closed just because "oh, he doesn't post in the pit"?This read to me that you were worried the precedent set by this thread closing made Cartooniverse immune from criticism because we are also planning to close any future Pit threads about him. It doesn't. You can Pit him, just like any other poster.
2. Fine, he made a decision. I realize that. I even pointed it out. I think it was a very poor decision, and that he didn't think of the ramifications of what he was doing. All I would like is for you to admit that a: Making an exception to board policy was a mistake and it won't happen again or b: Cartooniverse is now immune from responsibility for what he says, because anything he posts that is pit worthy will be closed instead of moved to the pit where it belongs. Which is fine, if that's the policy you want to make, then make it but at least have the balls to own up to it instead of prevaricating all over the place.What policy? There is no policy. If an OP asks to have a thread closed, we might close it. Or we might not. It completely depends on the situation. That's why we get paid the big bucks: to make these high stakes calls.

[Cat Whisperer]

Sorry I took so long to respond, but work beckoned me.
Minty got it right on the nose. The thread was started in IMHO, and I felt tht it was more of a BBQ Pit-type thread, so I moved it. Cartooniverse e-mailed me and told me of his self-imposed exile from the Pit, and asked me to close the thread, which I did. As TVeblen said, I just didn't know about this particular Pit situation.
I gotta go with Weirddave on this one - was the thread closed because it was time to close it, or simply because Cartooniverse has a particular tic? If the former, no problem. If the latter, that indicates favouritism for no particular good reason.

This brings up another question - if there is favouritism on these Boards, does it really matter? Why?

[Frank]

The thread was started in IMHO, and I felt tht it was more of a BBQ Pit-type thread, so I moved it. Cartooniverse e-mailed me and told me of his self-imposed exile from the Pit, and asked me to close the thread, which I did.
Cartooniverse chose to start a thread accusing an entire organization of horrid, immoral, and damn near evil activity. I do not see it as being part of your responsibility to rescue him from the consequences of that action. If it injures his sensibilities to be in the Pit, then he should not start a Pit thread in another forum.

3. Stop being a melodramatic douchebag.
Melodramatic douchebag or not, Weirddave has an excellent point. Please see above.

[Harborwolf]

Cartooniverse chose to start a thread accusing an entire organization of horrid, immoral, and damn near evil activity. I do not see it as being part of your responsibility to rescue him from the consequences of that action. If it injures his sensibilities to be in the Pit, then he should not start a Pit thread in another forum.

He didn't start a pit thread in another forum. Czarcasm thought it was more pitworthy and the responses might turn that way, so he moved it. Cartooniverse didn't post the thread where he did as some sort of dodge. If he had a pattern of this sort of thing, there would be a point here. Since he doesn't, there isn't.


Melodramatic douchebag or not, Weirddave has an excellent point. Please see above.

Weirddave can start his own pit thread about any sort of pittable behavior on cartooniverses part and noone will close it down. As such, he has no legs to stand on. The mods haven't even laced up the jackboots on this one. They made a judgement call. Life goes on.

[CarnalK]

ISTM the closing of a thread has always been left to the moderator's discretion. Since it's always been ad hoc there's no reason to think this is a policy change. You just have to get lucky with who gets your cowardly close request.

Harborwolf:
Weirddave can start his own pit thread about any sort of pittable behavior on cartooniverses part and noone will close it down. As such, he has no legs to stand on.

He does have one leg to stand on: people will give Weirddave grief for Pitting someone he knows "can't" fight back. Don't you think?

[Frank]

He didn't start a pit thread in another forum. Czarcasm thought it was more pitworthy and the responses might turn that way, so he moved it. Cartooniverse didn't post the thread where he did as some sort of dodge. If he had a pattern of this sort of thing, there would be a point here. Since he doesn't, there isn't.
It was a pit thread. How can you possibly read that thread and not see the pitworthiness of it? You're right in that Cartooniverse has not made a habit of that. I'll send my ire back to the barracks, and hope that if Cartooniverse wishes to stay out of the pit, he will not start any further threads that deserve the pit.

[TVeblen]

Paranoia is premature. It's being tossed around in the mod e-mail loop even as we speak. Type. Squint at the monitor and cuss.

This all evolved very simply. We've warned/advised posters before that they should avoid certain forums if they keep getting into trouble in them. It's used to help salvage posters if their problems are localized, so to speak.

It all happened quite a while ago, there weren't any more problems and so it was pretty much water over the dam. Don't bet the rent check on my memory, but I think this is the first time an avoid-forum was used for the Pit. The crucial difference was the forum, not the poster. It's a different wrinkle with the Pit, so give us a little time to iron it out.

And just FTR, I do not have balls, have never regretted the lack but do not burst out sobbing like, oh, Czarcasm. 'Something in his eye', phooey. He hasn't recoverd composure since Old Yeller got iced.

Veb

[Frank]

Squint at the monitor and cuss.
I can't wait for my new glasses! Eight more days.

[/MPSIMS]

[Spongemom]

I just have a few things to say.

1. My cats don't go outside anymore. They're miserable, but they're alive. Drop it and find something productive to do.

2. My neighbors are not completely innocent here: They have a new puppy now. Their Rott has mauled the puppy several times, once almost ripping its leg off. They still leave the puppy and the Rott in the backyard alone together.

3. Whoever said it, you're damn right that attack hurt. But for some reason, I'm breaking my vow to never return here just to make this post.

4. Whoever invaded my forum today and posted all over the place calling me a "cat murderer" and saying I got my cats killed on purpose, your posts are deleted, your IP and email address are banned, so stop. You're only wasting your time.

[Harborwolf]

He does have one leg to stand on: people will give Weirddave grief for Pitting someone he knows "can't" fight back. Don't you think?

I try not to think. It makes my head hurt. Also gets me into all kinds of trouble. ;)

Yeah, people will give weirddave some stick for pitting someone who won't post back, but if it's deserving than it won't amount to too much, will it?

TYM, I could go either way on that thread. He seemed to be asking a poll type question (asking about other peoples experiences either fer or agin.) The accusation is also pit material. Flip a coin I guess.

[TVeblen]

I just have a few things to say.

1. My cats don't go outside anymore. They're miserable, but they're alive. Drop it and find something productive to do.

2. My neighbors are not completely innocent here: They have a new puppy now. Their Rott has mauled the puppy several times, once almost ripping its leg off. They still leave the puppy and the Rott in the backyard alone together.

3. Whoever said it, you're damn right that attack hurt. But for some reason, I'm breaking my vow to never return here just to make this post.

4. Whoever invaded my forum today and posted all over the place calling me a "cat murderer" and saying I got my cats killed on purpose, your posts are deleted, your IP and email address are banned, so stop. You're only wasting your time.


This is NOT the thread to dredge up your old grievances, Spongemom. If you don't want any more attention called to your situation, then stop posting about it.
Whatever happened on your site, do not drag it back in here.

Veb

[Miller]

TYM, I could go either way on that thread. He seemed to be asking a poll type question (asking about other peoples experiences either fer or agin.) The accusation is also pit material. Flip a coin I guess.

You could say the same about a thread called, "Is Harborwolf an asshole?" It's still clearly pit material, even if phrased as a poll.

I'd vote "no," btw.

[alice_in_wonderland]

4. Whoever invaded my forum today and posted all over the place calling me a "cat murderer" and saying I got my cats killed on purpose, your posts are deleted, your IP and email address are banned, so stop. You're only wasting your time.

:eek:

Regardless of what my opinion is of your particular pet rearing habits, that was truely a cuntish thing for someone to do. I'm really sorry that happened.

[Spongemom]

This is NOT the thread to dredge up your old grievances, Spongemom. If you don't want any more attention called to your situation, then stop posting about it.
Whatever happened on your site, do not drag it back in here.

Veb
I'm not the one that brought the thing back into the light.

What happened on my site was a direct result of this thread. Someone from this forum came on my forum and filled it with threatening posts, and I'm not supposed to bring it up over here?

I've already asked that my thread be deleted, but I was told "we simply don't delete threads." Which is a pretty simple minded policy for a forum that pretends to care about its members, since the thread I wanted deleted is resulting in personal threats.

[TVeblen]

I'm not the one that brought the thing back into the light.

What happened on my site was a direct result of this thread. Someone from this forum came on my forum and filled it with threatening posts, and I'm not supposed to bring it up over here?

I've already asked that my thread be deleted, but I was told "we simply don't delete threads." Which is a pretty simple minded policy for a forum that pretends to care about its members, since the thread I wanted deleted is resulting in personal threats.

Well Spongemom, you've just put neon lights around it for anybody who might have missed it the first time around.

The topic of this thread is closing threads, not deleting them. We don't delete threads. Posters are warned in the registration agreement that they solely responsible for the content of their messages.

We are already in active communication with you via e-mail on this. I am warning you: Do not drag events on your site onto this board.

TVeblen

[CarnalK]

Harborwolf:
but if it's deserving than it won't amount to too much, will it?

I wouldn't bet on it either way. I've been too often surprised about who turns out the hero of a Pitting. Tuckerfan's is a recent example. I never imagined people defending "link find" spam but they did.

[Cat Whisperer]

You didn't start the fight, but you *are* continuing it. You've deleted the posts and blocked the poster - what do you hope to accomplish by posting here?

Said with all sympathy and compassion, you *really* need to let this go.

[Spongemom]

Well Spongemom, you've just put neon lights around it for anybody who might have missed it the first time around.

The topic of this thread is closing threads, not deleting them. We don't delete threads. Posters are warned in the registration agreement that they solely responsible for the content of their messages.

We are already in active communication with you via e-mail on this. I am warning you: Do not drag events on your site onto this board.

TVeblen
Active communication? That's a joke. I've gotten one single email, saying "We simply don't delete threads." That's all. That's active?

Don't "warn me" not to drag things from my site over here when it was this site that brought the crap to mine in the first place. I don't have to tolerate people threatening me, which is what one of your members did. Joined today, with the name "Informant", and made numerous posts all over my forum that pertained to nothing but my thread on here, and I doubt it would have happened, had the thread not been linked to in this thread. If, for some absurd reason, it can't be deleted, then disable the link to it in this thread.

Once again, I DO NOT have to tolerate personal threats.

[Spongemom]

You didn't start the fight, but you *are* continuing it. You've deleted the posts and blocked the poster - what do you hope to accomplish by posting here?

Said with all sympathy and compassion, you *really* need to let this go.
I'll let it go as soon as the thread is gone and the threats resulting from the thread stop. I'd hate to have to file harrassment charges, but that's exactly what's happening on my forum - harrassment, and it's a direct result of my thread not being deleted when I asked months ago.

[Cat Whisperer]

Um, that was referring to Spongemom.

[Frank]

I'll let it go as soon as the thread is gone and the threats resulting from the thread stop. I'd hate to have to file harrassment charges, but that's exactly what's happening on my forum - harrassment, and it's a direct result of my thread not being deleted when I asked months ago.
This is beyond the pale.

[belladonna]

Spongemom, you realize the board has zero obligation to submit to your demands, right? You signed up agreeing that anything you posted was theirs to do with as they please. Go cry about it somewhere else because doing it here is only going to draw more attention to it.

And threatening charges over internet message board postings? That's just sad.

[CarnalK]

Spongemom:
'll let it go as soon as the thread is gone and the threats resulting from the thread stop. I'd hate to have to file harrassment charges,

Perhaps instead of posting here you should be emailing whoever hosts the IP you banned. This thread is trying to discuss your case only in the abstract as it pertains to board policy. You only snowball your problems by dredging up the details here.

[CarnalK]

And if you want to get legal: you are actively contibuting to your damages rather than trying to mitigate them..

[Liz]

I'll let it go as soon as the thread is gone and the threats resulting from the thread stop. I'd hate to have to file harrassment charges, but that's exactly what's happening on my forum - harrassment, and it's a direct result of my thread not being deleted when I asked months ago.
I'm not being a smart ass, but file what charges? Against who? Because someone said something mean about you on the Internet? That's not going to fly.

Let it die and this thread will sink to the bottom of the Pit and be forgotten, just like your original post was. Will it crop back up in six months? A year? Doubtful, but maybe. That's what happens on forums. However, the faster it dies and moves on, the better chance of it being forgotten. Keep up your current actions and.. what? Find yourself banned? Piss off more asshole lurkers that can go and deface your forum? Let this thread spin into a six page trainwreck that everyone will reference, which will lead back to your original thread?

Seriously. Let it go. The only person who's going to pay any sort of "consequences" here is you, unfortunately.

[Spongemom]

I'm not being a smart ass, but file what charges? Against who? Because someone said something mean about you on the Internet? That's not going to fly.

Let it die and this thread will sink to the bottom of the Pit and be forgotten, just like your original post was. Will it crop back up in six months? A year? Doubtful, but maybe. That's what happens on forums. However, the faster it dies and moves on, the better chance of it being forgotten. Keep up your current actions and.. what? Find yourself banned? Piss off more asshole lurkers that can go and deface your forum? Let this thread spin into a six page trainwreck that everyone will reference, which will lead back to your original thread?

Seriously. Let it go. The only person who's going to pay any sort of "consequences" here is you, unfortunately.
When someone says that they are going to hunt a person down and tear them up like a dog would, yes, charges can be filed.

I left a long time ago, thinking that my thread would drop and be forgotten, and look what happened.

[TVeblen]

Active communication? That's a joke. I've gotten one single email, saying "We simply don't delete threads." That's all. That's active?

Don't "warn me" not to drag things from my site over here when it was this site that brought the crap to mine in the first place. I don't have to tolerate people threatening me, which is what one of your members did. Joined today, with the name "Informant", and made numerous posts all over my forum that pertained to nothing but my thread on here, and I doubt it would have happened, had the thread not been linked to in this thread. If, for some absurd reason, it can't be deleted, then disable the link to it in this thread.

Once again, I DO NOT have to tolerate personal threats.

Wrong, Spongemom. You alone are responsible for what you post here. We didn't make you write it. We do not turn the Dope's written record into swiss cheese just because people sometimes post things they later regret.

Stop blaming our members and this board for consequences arising from your own actions.

I not only can warn you, you better take it dead seriously. If you don't knock this off, immediately, I'll put you into temporary ban, pending full review. You seem hellbent and determined to reprise your trainwreck, but that doesn't mean we'll allow you to do it.

TVeblen

[hajario]

Spongemom, So some dickhead spammed your site, you banned his IP and it stopped. If you would never have come back here, no one would have known. Now we all know and it will put the same idea into the mind of a few more people and you'll likely get hit again. Had you shut the fuck up, that wouldn't have happened. Bad move.

Haj

[TVeblen]

Spongemom has been suspended for a few days, not banned. Only admins can customize the labels, and none are online right now. The situation had gone far enough (too far), as had the hijack.

Veb

[Miller]

You're threatening legal actions... because somebody posted mean things about you... on your internet forum... about your cats.

Right now, Jean Teasdale is laughing at you.

[Miller]

Wow. My timing sucks, and I look like a dick. TVeblen's post about the banning wasn't there when I previewed.

[TVeblen]

Sorry to do this folks, but this thread is hopelessly compromised. It isn't kosher to make Spongemom the topic since she's on suspension and can't reply.

If someone wants to re-start the original issue under discussion, that's fine. Link to this thread so the entire discussion isn't lost, but leave Spongemom out of it.

Veb