OK, enough's enough

[Lynn Bodoni]

Yes, this IS the BBQ Pit. However, some folks have been taking it way too far, particularly in regards to vulgarity and personal attacks, particularly to innocent third parties. From now on, if a post goes over the line, I delete or modify it. And I'm the one who draws the line.

Lynn/SDStaff Lynn
For the Straight Dope

[AuraSeer]

How about a hint as to what's allowed and what's not?

Or do posters now have to wander around like dogs inside one of those invisible fences, not knowing where the line is, but assured of getting an electric shock if they cross it?

------------------
I'm not a warlock.
I'm a witch with a Y chromosome.

[matt_mcl]

Um, I thought that was the point... Frankly, you sound like the folks at my school who put up a graffiti board and then shut it down when people started to write what they thought. We have this great message board here, EXPRESSLY for flaming, and I think that it would be foolish of you to delete it. Non-flaming posts on controversial subjects belong on Great Debates, yesno?

[Stoid]

Yes, if this is to be the new policy (The BBQ Pit: Flame away, but be nice and don't talk dirty!) it would be nice to have some actual guidelines as opposed to:

"I am the Goddess of the Board and I shall make My Decisions as I See fit. Question me not, and obey!"

I'm wondering which posts in particular instigated this? Maybe I'm frequenting the wrong threads, but I haven't seen anything out of line, except us ganging up on Adam (who can take it like a man, I may add).

[TubaDiva]

How about a hint as to what's allowed and what's not?

Yes, if this is to be the new policy (The BBQ Pit: Flame away, but be nice and don't talk dirty!) it would be nice to have some actual guidelines

There ARE actual guidelines. Have been all along, folks have just forgotten or lost sight of them.

Reproduced from the registration form, the stuff you clicked by when you signed up here:

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

We give you more latitude in the Pit (that's the whole point), but that's your Words To Live By. Or, at least, the Words You Agreed To Live By When You Got Here.

Cecil sums it up best of all, and it's also in the registration form:

Don't Be a Jerk.

For most of our folks, living by these simple rules is not difficult.

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

[Mr Thin Skin]

"Mr. Zotti, you're on in five"

[Mr.Zambezi]

I just read through the "My Pet Trolls" thread and it is pretty painful to read. It sounds like a couple of 13 year olds trying to outgross one another. I can't even tell wht the subject is.

I ahave to agree with Lynn here. There is a line. Some stuff is just simply vulgar and offensive. and after all, it is their board.

[C K Dexter Haven]

You misrepresenting what I said, Con3. I said we want the rules to be flexible enough to go by "smell test." I said that we did NOT want to draw up a 30-page document defining what's OK and what's not. There are certainly shades of grey, but there IS black and white, as well. I personally think the line has been crossed -- way and beyond.

You come over into the forum that I moderate, and try this malarky, and see how fast the rules are enforced.

[Mr.Zambezi]

Suggestion: Replace "Don't be a jerk" with "Don't act like Contestant #3."

Anyone unclear on what this means could easily find examples of how not to act.

[C K Dexter Haven]

I dunno, I guess I always thought there was a difference between "flaming" and simply "cursing out."

And, no, Con#3, I'm neither threatening nor taunting you, I'm describing reality.

[SkeptiJess]

Am I correct in assuming that Dex is responding to posts by Con #3 that have been pulled? If so, yippeeee! Not having to read any of Connie's posts (even by accident) will just about make my day!

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

[Lynn Bodoni]

I expect people to act like adults in here. When they don't, I'm gonna put them in time out. I can mass-delete all of a poster's messages in one easy operation. Right now, I only chose to delete in one forum, the one that I moderate. It may be that C3 has made good points in other forums. However, I haven't seen any good posts by him in this forum, and I have seen a lot of nasty posts. Usually way, WAY over the limit. So far, C3 has retained posting privileges. Whether or not he keeps them is entirely up to him.

I'm going to TRY to go through the threads and delete posts that make no sense without C3's posts. But I'm not going to guarantee it. Deleting individual posts is a pain.

"I am the Goddess of the Board and I shall make My Decisions as I See fit. Question me not, and obey!"

I like it! But, of course, I've got permission to do this from the boss.

Lynn/SDStaff Lynn
For the Straight Dope

[Gr8Kat]

I always liked, "My decisions are arbitrary, prejudiced, and final!"

------------------
"I hope life isn't a big joke, because I don't get it," Jack Handy

[mr john]

So's your old man!

[pricciar]

I don't get it. I agree some of Connie's posts were over the line. And some were vulgar. But, how does that make it fair to delete all of them, or did I misunderstand, and you just deleted the ones in this thread only?

I mean, I read the one he said to Mr. Zambezi, He wasn't vulgar, or even very mean, just kind of petty, didn't seem reason enough to delete him.

don't know, doesnt seem quite fair to take them all out.

on the other hand, i guess its a big pain to delete individual posts, so maybe thats why you did it.

pat

[Czarcasm]

I guess part of this is my fault. I DID get a little upset when I was accused of stalking an underaged poster, and VERY upset when he took some very cheap shots at my wife. If I went overboard in any of my replies, I apologize.
Note to all-I WILL drop off any thread where three people think I am trolling. I try to learn from my mistakes.

[Stoid]

I have to say I do enjoy c#3's handle.

[Contestant #3]

On 7-6-99 I wrote this:

"Look folks,
I'm not issuing a complaint. Go back and read my OP if you re confused about that. I'm not insulted or offended by sexual language or situations either.
The whole point is this:

The TOS says this specifically:

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is:

1. knowingly false and/or defamatory,

2. inaccurate,

3. abusive,

4. vulgar,

5. hateful,

6. harassing,

7. obscene,

8. profane,

9. sexually oriented,

10. threatening,

11. invasive of a person's privacy,

12. or otherwise violative of any law.

I certainly didn't invent this. It's there for anyone to read. I simply asked an honest question about #9. I could also make a strong case with plenty of examples of regular violations of numbers 1-6 as well.

There is no need for anyone to get so defensive, turning the tables toward me. If you can't or won't answer the question that I have posed then simply admit it.

I suspect that I already know the answer. It is this:

That the TOS are a joke. The TOS needs to be modified to remove items 1-6, and 9. Why? Because those items are not actionable violations (in practice), rather they are normal and accepted types of posts here on the SDMB.

That is all."

and on 7-17-99, CDEXThavn responded with this:

"You're damn right the rules are fuzzy. That's our stand; we're trying to protect our ass(es), and we (advised by our lawyers) are the best judge of where that protection line should be drawn.

Does that mean that our stance is subjective? You bet. We are under no obligation to set objective standards. We are not a law court and not a government office, required to be fair and even-handed. We do our best to be fair and even-handed, but we make no pretense that we have (or want to have) firm definitions. We use a smell test -- does it smell like it could cause problems? If yes, then we act. If no, then we don't.

If you don't like it, go find another site. The alt.fan.cecil-adams site, for instance, has no sponsors, as I understand it, so no modators and no rules. You'd be much happier there, I'm sure."


There you have it folks. I've already posted this once tonight and it's been deleted. They don't want you to know the truth out here. Their new motto should be "Covering up our mistakes since 1999. There's a lot to do!"



------------------
Contestant #3

[C K Dexter Haven]

Con#3 quoted the rules:
<< You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is:
1. knowingly false and/or defamatory,
2. inaccurate,
3. abusive,
4. vulgar,
5. hateful,
6. harassing,
7. obscene,
8. profane,
9. sexually oriented,
10. threatening,
11. invasive of a person's privacy,
12. or otherwise violative of any law. >>

Yes, we have been lax in enforcement in the BBQ Pit, this is supposed to be an arena for flaming. Con#3 has demonstrated the folly of the administrators being too lax; since he first posted this, his posts have violated all 12 of these. Well, the first 11, anyway.

There are certainly grey areas, and there are many grey areas in the BBQ Pit... but there's black and white as well. Enough is enough.

[aseymayo]

Hey Lynn! Don't goddesses usually demand a human sacrifice? Let's see...who can we get?
I know!

[Contestant #3]

Lynn, who states that she hasn't seen ANY "good" posts by me in this forum, obviously forgets her own posting in the "Maybe hells cool" thread in which she responds to a post of mine that shared with the other members that a SF book that I read called "Inferno" was an interesting depiction of Hell.

Here's what she wrote:

"The Inferno Cont3 is talking about was written by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. It's an intriguing read, and it gives a good reason for hell, and reconciles the existence of hell with a loving God. I'm still an atheist, but if I was to believe in the Christian religion, this is likely to be the only way I could stomach it.
I refuse to go into the book in depth, because it would spoil it. But don't be put off by the fact that the authors write science fiction."

Remember that one Lynn?


------------------
Contestant #3

[Monty]

C3: apparently you're unfamiliar with the difference between a moderated board and an unmoderated board. Moderator censor. That's their job, that's what they do, that's what they're their for. As to why, look in your own mirror.

[Contestant #3]

Hey Monty,

Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

Now if I may return the favor, moderators are to moderate fairly and even-handedly, leaving personal gruges aside. They shouldn't have different sets of rules that they apply haphazardly.

Let me know if you need another lesson.

------------------
Contestant #3

[Monty]

As Lynn has done; quite fairly, in fact.

The only one with a grudge (and a penchant for posting the same thing all over the board) is you, C3.

[Contestant #3]

You got me there! Yes, you are correct Monty, I DO have a grudge.

But you are incorrect concerning Lynn's fairness.

If Lynn was fair, she would have chastized Slythe.

If Lynn was fair, she would have deleted BaBar714's "cum-sucking troll" remark as the vulgar trash that it is.

No, there's no fairness here. There's only punishment of me and me alone.

And all the while, people are poking sharp sticks at me and then crying when I respond. Does anyone point out their behavior?

I gotta give you credit, at least your last two posts here have not been straight-up insults. Your brethren have not behaved as admirably. How about recognizing that fact?

------------------
Contestant #3

[Lynn Bodoni]

When I clean house, I always start with the dirtiest section.

I USUALLY send first notices by email, out of courtesy. Don't assume that I haven't talked to people if it isn't posted on the MB. I've written several people privately, and I will keep their names private, unless they start posting it on the MB. I think that most people prefer a private note. And if that works, then that's what they get.

I am not perfect, but I do the best job that I can.

Throwing temper tantrums is probably not the best way to win people to a cause.

Lynn/SDStaff Lynn
For the Straight Dope

[JillGat]

[[When I clean house, I always start with the dirtiest section.
I USUALLY send first notices by email, out of courtesy. Don't assume that I haven't talked to people if it isn't posted on the MB. I've written several people privately, and I will keep their names private, unless they start posting it on the MB. I think that most people prefer a private note. And if that works, then that's what they get.
I am not perfect, but I do the best job that I can.]]

Go, Lynn. And I don't see many arguing with your actions so far.

[C K Dexter Haven]

I also notice that the complaint that I've seen has not been that Lynn wasn't justified, but that Lynn wasn't even-handed.

"Gosh, officer, why are you arresting me for armed robbery of this bank, when the clerks who work there steal pens and paper from the bank every day? You're not being even-handed in your treatment of us robbers!"

An amusing defense.

[Contestant #3]

Another shitty analogy.

It's more like they stole a Chevy Cavalier and I stole a Mercedes Benz. Yep, mine is more flashy, but both instances are still auto theft.

We're busting the theft of the Benz and poo pooing the Chevy theft...

The only difference is that one is a better theif...

------------------
Contestant #3

[Eutychus]

The fact that you mentioned Chevys tends to be very telling.



------------------
Saint Eutychus
www.disneyshorts.org (http://www.disneyshorts.org)

[AuraSeer]

Can I start a thread titled "Contestant #3 is a whiner"? Would anyone disagree with me?

[Big Iron]

{{The fact that you mentioned Chevys tends to be very telling.}} Eut

LOL LOL LOL ... too funny!


Hmmmm ... I wonder if he has a strong opinion on whether the size of a car's tires affects the odometer reading.

Kiss kiss ...

[Contestant #3]

Nope, no opinion either way on the tire issue.

Did I read where someone refered to you as an attorney? Curious,

------------------
Contestant #3

[Big Iron]

That one was too tricky for you, huh?

[Contestant #3]

What are you refering to? The tires or the attorney thing?

------------------
Contestant #3

[Satan]

Well, I actually sit back andjoy the rise C3 gets out of many of you most of the time. And unlike the trolls in unmoderated newsgroups I frequent, he occassionally makes a point that is not inflamatory.

That said, I think he oes sometimes go over the line... It's one thing to bait a moderator with a loaded question - quite another to dismiss someone he disagreed with an "ignorant slut."

Just my $0.02...

------------------
Brian O'Neill
CMC International Records
rockuniverse.com/cmc/cmc.html (http://rockuniverse.com/cmc/cmc.html)

ICQ 35294890
AIM Scrabble1
Yahoo Messenger Brian_ONeill

[StrTrkr777]

Well if it is our old buddy 55, he has given up the LOL too funny and talking of cars and gone to pure insults.

Jeffery

[SkeptiJess]

Connie -- back on the AOL board we had a mondo obnoxio troll named Chevy55. His leitmotif was "LOL LOL LOL." He was a real twerp. BTW, everyone, although I am no huge fan of Contestant #3, he is by no means as horrible as Chevy. At least Connie can spell and punctuate.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

[Contestant #3]

Thanks for the grudgingly-given compliment Jess. If I ever called you an ignorant slut I take it back...

------------------
Contestant #3

[Satan]

Something else just occured to me...

I name no names, nor do I plan on making this into a flame war, and though I could look back and find concrete evidence, I choose not to, in the hopes that anyone the following bit of logic might apply to will know it within themselves...

To wit: A lot of people were infuriated at the possibility of censorship which cost a moderator her employ here.

In addition: A lot of people are infuriated that C3 is seemingly given free reign here, and not taken to task by the powers that be.

I'm willing to bet that many Dopers think and/or acted (posted) in agreeance with both of the above recent dilemas.

I submit that to be total hypocrisy and nothing less... And if you are someone who felt this way, I suggest you learn to take the protected speech you don't agree with with the stuff you would fight to be able to express and be heard.

[Satan]

Something else just occured to me...

I name no names, nor do I plan on making this into a flame war, and though I could look back and find concrete evidence, I choose not to, in the hopes that anyone the following bit of logic might apply to will know it within themselves...

To wit: A lot of people were infuriated at the possibility of censorship which cost a moderator her employ here.

In addition: A lot of people are infuriated that C3 is seemingly given free reign here, and not taken to task by the powers that be.

I'm willing to bet that many Dopers think and/or acted (posted) in agreeance with both of the above recent dilemas.

I submit that to be total hypocrisy and nothing less... And if you are someone who felt this way, I suggest you learn to take the protected speech you don't agree with with the stuff you would fight to be able to express and be heard.

[Czarcasm]

Maybe we should try to remember that we are guests, the Straight Dope AND his minions are the hosts, and act accordingly. If you get drunk, try not to throw up on the carpet. If you are called aside and asked not to do something, try to remember where you are. And if the host doesn't want to talk about something, just remember who's paying for that beer that you're drinking.
This website isn't free, and unless a majority of us can show our reciepts for a Chicago Reader subscription, it does NOT pay for itself.
So I say Thank You for the time, Thank You for the effort shown(and NOT shown), and Thank You for showing a sense of humor in these trying times.

[Big Iron]

{{[[That one was too tricky for you, huh?]]


What are you refering to? The tires or the attorney thing?}} C3


Both, apparently.

[Nickrz]

To wit: A lot of people were infuriated at the possibility of censorship which cost a moderator her employ here.
I'm willing to bet that many Dopers think and/or acted (posted) in agreeance with both of the above recent dilemas.Thank you. I've noticed the ones screaming the loudest over a moderator's posts being censored and a moderator being fired for her "politically incorrect" viewpoint are now the ones screaming loudest that moderators be forced to post under a psuedonym. I'll never understand that kind of pretzel logic/ethic.

[JillGat]

[[Thanks for the grudgingly-given compliment Jess. If I ever called you an ignorant slut I take it back...]]

No, that was me. I'm the ignorant slut. And don't you forget it.

[According to Pliny]

I've noticed the ones screaming the loudest over a moderator's posts being censored and a moderator being fired for her "politically incorrect" viewpoint are now the ones screaming loudest that moderators be forced to post under a psuedonym.

Nick - Everybody knows I'm the one screaming loudest over deleted posts and making moderators totally impartial(faceless). I NEVER objected to Melin's firing.

In fact, I think you should all be fired.

(You can all thank Nick for evoking the following rant)

I always hated the in-crowd when I was in High School. You know. That cliquish group that always hung together and pronounced their group judgement from on high. You modererators have made it clear that some here are more equal than others. You could easily ignore Connie, yet you all insist on using him to make yourselves feel superior. Even when posting to members who haven't garnered your wrath, you write in the most patronizing and paternal manner imaginable. (If Nick calls me "dear reader" one more time I'm going to break my knuckles on the monitor screen.)

If nothing else, these threads show that none of the moderatators are impartial. In fact they have a gang mentality that spurs them all to jump to each others defence as soon as any sign of opposition shows itself.

The fact that none of you want to moderate under a pseudonym, just shows how ego-driven your participation in this board is. You really love seeing that "moderator" tag under your names. It would just kill you to be demoted back to member. None of you volunteered out of the goodness of your hearts. You volunteered so you could be "better" than people like Connie.

As members I found you all quite fair and informative. As moderators you're the biggest bunch of elitist snobs this side of a DAR meeting.

[quadell]

I just dropped back to see if anything had changed.

I see the moderators have not stopped arbitrarily deleting threads of people they don't like based on their whims. I see they still do not treat members with respect, and have still shown themselves unable to back down or apologize.

*sigh*

Later,
Your Quadell

[Lew]

As far as deleting of individual posts is concerned: I don't understand what the uproar is about. I am not offended by language, content, etc. If a post is making an actual, valid point...I read it. If someone is attacking, swearing, trolling, etc. for the express purpose of throwing a tantrum or flaming someone...I don't read the post. EASY!! If I come to the pit and check out threads I may find some interesting topics, I may find pointless rants. Some or all of the posts may be informative or enlightening, others may be, in my opinion, childish foot-stomping. Whatever it is, I expect to see offensive entries in this forum. I simply skip the posts that have nothing to do with anything outside the person doing the spewing. Regarding the present target..I may have found flaming or playing devil's advocate to often be the case with Con #3; I choose to approach his/her (sorry, I don't know which) posts with "awareness". If I sense flaming..I skip it..if I don't..I read with the expectation that there is a point, not with the assumption that it's crap. Just as I would anyone else. I don't need someone else to protect me from this. I do, however, appreciate the fact that they can and do delete posts that are clearly nothing more that personal attacks. These do nothing but degrade the threads and prevent an open exchange of actual thought. I also know that moderators have to power to delete, so if they choose to be offended by language or ideas, they will do so. If any of these people were actually face to face with someone they would attempt some other, more immediate, way to "erase" what was said. (if they could get away with it)
BTW: I have been turning this whole thing over in my head this past week, spending time at other forums and lurking around here. It's been good. I have a new perspective on SD and, with that in mind, have decided to continue to frequent these boards. Those moderators that enjoy wielding power, sticking blindly to a decision or who have personal agendas will continue to use (or not) policies and guidelines arbitrarily, to those ends. Those that don't, won't likely start. While there are some folks that I have been disappointed by, there are, by far, many more that I enjoy conversing with (although some aren't around much these days, I think they might be lurking too, and maybe will return)and even more I have yet to meet. I figure; ignorance still needs to be fought, we just need to realize that it exists everywhere, even among the staff and "powers" at SD. They are, after all, the minority here. (I say that only because they have chosen to present themselves as a group with a collective mind, in terms of each other. They mustn't ever disagree in public.) So what? I have found the members here to be, consistantly, far more enlightening and enjoyable. The exceptions to that were Melin and Jill. Ones gone and the other showed a side I hadn't seen before. Maybe it's always been there and I didn't see it...maybe she, like most of us, has too much emotion tied up in the topic in question...maybe her and Melin had other problems and this was a catalyst. Who knows?
I have found some interesting and worthwhile forums that can provide what this doesn't. So, when I want to engage in a specific serious, open dicussion, without being flamed, attacked or deleted, that's where I will go. I will continue to attempt those same types of discussions here, with lesser expectations for now. Though, I realize that a lot of problems could be solved if folks would take the time to read an entire thread b/4 jumping in with knee-jerk responses.
It would all be so much simpler if one could
if we took things in context..oh well...

Just a Dreamer

[Jahender]

My Pop has a saying that I think applies here: "He who has the gold, makes the rules"

If you are disappointed with the conduct of the administrators too f-in bad, get your own message board.

------------------
The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it.
George Bernard Shaw

[Contestant #3]

Oh yeah...well...my dad can kick your dad's ass!!!

------------------
Contestant #3

[kellibelli]

For the record, C3, I think you are great, I dont see the problem...maybe it is because I also have a LIFE!!!
y'know, with the whole melin thing, the loss of Quadell, and now this, I really dont think this place is worth the trouble, censorship sucks in any form.
If you dont like C3, dont read those posts.
You moderators/dictators are acting like a bunch of steroid riddled jocks...DO IT!!! WHY?? CAUSE I SAID SO AND I CAN MAKE YOU!!
whatever
BITE ME.

[Contestant #3]

Kellibelli,

Damm you're good!

------------------
Contestant #3

[Dirty Devil]

Hey C3, I agree with kellibelli. I have no problem with you at all. I actually look for your topics and responses. Where you go, usually fire will follow. You can get seemingly quiet, timid, politically correct people to totally loose it and fly off the handle. I think this is kinda' healthy. And it is rather fun to watch. You add a lot of color to this board, which seems to be getting grayer and grayer these days. I say that if people can't handle you, tough shit, they shouldn't read or respond to what you post. You have as much right to be here as the rest of us do. I can think of a lot of other members of the SDMB that I would get rid of before I got rid of you.

[Lew]

Thank you. I've noticed the ones screaming the loudest over a moderator's posts being censored and a moderator being fired for her "politically incorrect" viewpoint are now the ones screaming loudest that moderators be forced to post under a psuedonym. I'll never understand that kind of pretzel logic/ethic.

Nick...you, along with most other moderators, still refuse to "get it". As one who was screaming loudest...The issue was over deleting entire threads. (The fact that you choose to delete some posts for minor offenses and leave others with major offenses is arbitrary on your part, and therefore questionable) There were a lot of people having an honest open discussion on that thread..the best one I've seen on this forum. Total disregard was shown for all of us. The firing of Melin inflamed some of us because she was protesting what some of us saw as a prejudicial statement. (or in Cecil's words...fighting ignorance.) FTR: You have never heard me express a desire for anyone to alternate identities. I like to actually listen and discuss with A person, not multiple personalities. But that will never happen on the web..so why act as though anyone does or does not represent honestly?

As far as I can see, some of you fit perfectly into Papabear's summation, though I hate to use words like none, all, never, etc. You also seem to see those of us that protested as some sort of gang/group, because you never did recognize that we all had individual points to make, let alone really listen to what they were. What can I say...ignorance abounds.

If nothing else, these threads show that none of the moderators are impartial. In fact they have a gang mentality that spurs them all to jump to each others defence as soon as any sign of opposition shows itself.

[kellibelli]

They like me, they really like me!
(wiping tears)
I'd like to thank the academy.....

really though, I love arguing with you guys, even (gag) Bjork!

stick to your guns my friends.

[C K Dexter Haven]

Lew says: << . If a post is making an actual, valid point...I read it. If someone is attacking, swearing, trolling, etc. for the express purpose of throwing a tantrum or flaming someone...I don't read the post. EASY!! >>

Easy for you, maybe. For me, it's hard to know what a post says until AFTER I've read it.

This is a moderated board, that's the way the READER set it up. As long as we have that as a given, there will always be cases where someone is unhappy with any moderating. We do our best to keep the greatest number happy and to satisfy the READER's requirements.

In any case, Lew, I'm glad to have you back.

Could you please explain to me, though: about the deletion of the entire thread. Ed apologized and admitted it was an error. Why is there is still an uproar about that?

[bj0rn]

kellibelli: why, thank you...i can almost take that as a compliment :). by the way, your n key seems to have a malfunction every once in a while. now if you are doing this on purpose i must point out that all the spelling thing was a part of another tread. and if you are thinking this as an insult of some kind i think you have to back up your accusations or be deleted. if you really want to get into this now, i can tell you that bjork is a female name here in iceland, although i guess you know that. bjorn is a male name and means in your language "bear". if you really want to misspell my name it would be better to say birna, that being a female "bear" in my language. now analyzing this insult thing i must confess i dont feel at all bad about what you said to me, reason being...who cares if you are a man or a woman when posting on this messageboard?
now another thing, i first read a posting from you a while ago, it was something of a flaming towards me. and in your every post mentioning me, you breathe a little fire in my direction. i have answered as politely as i can (considering your words as i wrote mine). but it still leaves me thinking what did i ever do to you? you have from the start decided to disagree with me, and with a flaming attitude to back it up. in that smoking topic you resented that i agreed with you and mentioned something about your ass in the process, some burning sensation if my memory serves me correctly. well anyhows, im not out to always disagree with people i dont like, and i really try to like as many people as possible, some are making it a very difficult job to say the least.
well enough of that, there is this delete and con#3 issue. con#3 hasnt done anything to me (nothing i remember anyway, so if he did it wasnt really harmful), although he or some other people here on this messageboard might have said some things with a PG stamp.
the point being deleting posts, which violate the guidelines to which the people of straighdope work with, is a tool needed here. not badly because i havent read many, i any posts which deserve deletion. although baseless acusations of another persons character is not really wanted, it is in most cases not really bad enough for deletion.

point taken!

[Jahender]

Probably C3, my Dad's back sucks. At least it always seems to suck when I'm kicking his ass up and down the golf course.

Me: "Hey Dave, I kicking your ass by four strokes"
Dad: "Cut me a break will ya, my back hurts"
Me: "Suck it up old fart, I'm beating you like a pinata in Cinco de Mayo, I'm beating you like a steel drum in Jamaica..."
Dad: "Fuck off"
Me: "Not until I out drive your punkass 3-Wood with this 2-iron bitch, I own you like a cheap pair of sneakers Alice"
Dad: "give me a break, this is the third round I've played this week"
Me: "god, you've played three times this week and you still putt like Stevie Wonder, you really suck"
(and so on and so forth for 18 holes)

The above dialogue is obviously not revelant, but only intended for comic relief, please resume to your general level of flaming. Thank you.

[Contestant #3]

That was pretty funny Jahender.

------------------
Contestant #3

[kellibelli]

good dialogue...very funny..
Bjorn, you just kinda get on my nerves, this dates back to the whole icelanders vs the rest of the planet debate....I purposely call you bjork ( I believe there is a singer with that name, an odd looking little creature of no discernible sex that you put me in mind of.)but I'll stop though.

I really enjoy disagreeing with you, so stop being so damn nice!

honestly my adamant dislike of you is meant to ellicit a smile...I also told my best friend that when she bickers whith her husband in front of me that it gives me a rash...etc.
nothing personal little bear.
kisses
Kelli

[Satan]

I purposely call you bjork ( I believe there is a singer with that name, an odd looking little creature of no discernible sex that you put me in mind of.)

Ack! I love Bjork!! Hell, even Wayne from Wayne's World said he'd like to "Bjork her!"

[kellibelli]

really ruined the image of Bjork as sexy, didnt I?
sorry.
I bet it will be hard to fantasise about her now...
(holding in a huge belly laugh)

UM...have a nice day..
hahahahahahahahahahah
whew...needed that.

[bj0rn]

ahem...i must say that i consider you a much better person now that you have said that.
---------------------------------------------
being nice is a way of life - bj0rn

[Satan]

Oh, why don't you two just get a room.

A non-smoking room...

[kellibelli]

now THAT was funny.
seriously though...can loverock come too?

[The Ryan]

Jess
Member posted 08-13-1999 05:49 PM
“Am I correct in assuming that Dex is responding to posts by Con #3 that have been pulled?”

I hope so. The only other explanation I can think of is that he’s having a conversation with the voices in his head. :)


CKDextHavn
Administrator posted 08-14-1999 03:29 PM
“Gosh, officer, why are you arresting me for armed robbery of this bank, when the clerks who work there steal pens and paper from the bank every day? You're not being even-handed in your treatment of us robbers!"
An amusing defense.”

An even better analogy, IMO, than either this one or c#3’s would be “Gee officer, there aren’t any guards around here, the clerks let me walk right in and take the money, and everyone else in the bank was grabbing as much cash as they can carry. I thought the bank had decided to give its money away.”

The fact of the matter is that it is pretty much impossible to have an in-depth conversation without breaking these rules. When I read them, I figured they were so all-encompassing that they were more to encourage the vague, ill-defined standard of “don’t be a jerk” than to provide an actual guide to behavior. Here’s list of the rules, along with statement that could be construed as breaking the rule.

1. knowingly false and/or defamatory,
“In 1994, three teenagers disappeared while investigating reports of a ‘Blair Witch’. ”
2. inaccurate,
“The human body contains 200 bones.”
3. abusive,
“You are absolutely, 100% dead wrong.”
4. vulgar,
“Have you seen Austin Powers 2: The Spy Who Shagged Me?”
5. hateful,
“Those neo-Nazis really annoy me.”
6. harassing,
“I still haven’t heard a response from you. Do you have a rebuttal or not?”
7. obscene,
“Research suggests that the female orgasm may aid conception.”
8. profane,
“Jesus was a real jerk.”
9. sexually oriented,
“So, have you heard that the Mormon church declared that it will fight against the recognition of gay marriages?”
10. threatening,
“If you continue to go off topic, I’m just going to ignore you.”
11. invasive of a person's privacy,
“Have you ever used pot?”
12. or otherwise violative of any law.
“The following article has been banned from China:”

By making the rules so hard to follow, ignoring the vast majority of violations (I could probably find somwthing wrong with at least half the posts), allowing administrators/moderators to ignore the rules, and creating a forum expressly for those that wish to break the rules, you make the few cases where you do enforce the rules seem like instances of singling one person out. You've basicaly said "It's against the rules to say anything that someone else might not like, but we'll only enforce this when we feel like it." It seems to me you might as well be honest and say that there's only one rule: don't do anything the administration doesn't want you to do.

CKDextHavn
Administrator posted 08-17-1999 08:07 AM
“Could you please explain to me, though: about the deletion of the entire thread. Ed apologized and admitted it was an error. Why is there is still an uproar about that?”

There’s sort of a difference between someone trying to make something right because they feel bad about it vs. they don’t think they’ll get away with it, isn’t there? Not that we know which one is the true state of affairs, but some people apparently aren’t inclined to give Ed the benefit of the doubt.


------------------
-Ryan
" 'Ideas on Earth were badges of friendship or enmity. Their content did not matter.' " -Kurt Vonnegut, Breakfast of Champions