Disingenuous assertions by Tuba re status restoration

[ambushed]

TubaDiva got permission from the OP to evade responsibility for the disingenuous language Tuba has repeatedly used to deny any and all ability to make status changes. Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status; it is instead a criticism of Tuba's disingenuous word choice.

I will repeat it (from here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11861850&postcount=6)):The number one rule of retaining Charter Membership is that you continue to keep that subscription in force. Failing to do so -- as in this case -- means the Charter Member status is lost. Once lost it cannot be restored.

I'm sorry we cannot fulfill your request.
[emphasis added by ambushed]
I've received the same ill-considered reply from a much stronger argument involving the fact that at the time my posts showed a change from "Charter Member" to "Guest", the board tech person reported that people were being misreported as "Guests" who were actually still "Charter Members" (and that people should be patient and wait to see if the matter resolved itself). Thus, having not received the renewal email, I let the matter slide until I later learned I had missed the deadline.

I also emphasized that I was not asking for the reduced price but simply that my status be restored because the loss was a consequence of board tech problems and/or the confusion that resulted.

So what do I consider to be "ill-considered" about these replies? That word "cannot". When these issues were most prominent, here in this forum Dex came right out and admitted that they certainly could restore someone's status (technically and procedurally), and do it easily, but there might well be difficulties in verifying that someone actually was a Charter Member. So I spent weeks scouring my old hard drives and old Internet archives for such proof, but after all that effort, when I presented this evidence along with my request to repair my status, you, Tuba, again relied exclusively on the word "cannot".

At this point, I just want to call you, Tuba, on your insistent use of the word "cannot" in this context. It's not the honest word choice. I suggest telling people the truth by using the only appropriate and candid word: "won't".

That's all I had to say.

[Fiveroptic]

How do you know it's not the "honest word choice"? My interpretation is that when this first came up, there were behind-the-scenes discussions wherein it was decided that there would not be changes allowed, and to do so for one person would stir a hornets' next. While changing a status is technically possible, doing so would be breaking an agreed-upon standard, something Tuba cannot do according to her own code of ethics.

Really, can we give this pedantic crap a rest? Is there nothing more interesting to gripe about?

[jjimm]

As in "we cannot for commercial reasons".

(IMO, without prejudice, BFD, get over it.)

[Fiveroptic]

Damn. I need to learn to say it in a sentence or less. But then if I did that, I wouldn't really be conveying the person you've all never grown to know or love. Therefore, I shall henceforth continue to use extraneous sentences to say what jjimm does in five words.

[Shodan]

I cannot believe how petty some complaints are.
(Emphasis added by Shodan.)

Regards,
Shodan

[tacoloco]

At this point, I just want to call you, Tuba, on your insistent use of the word "cannot" in this context. It's not the honest word choice. I suggest telling people the truth by using the only appropriate and candid word: "won't".


You have got to be kidding.

Cannot doesn't have to mean there's a technical prohibition. It can easily mean there is a procedural or policy prohibition.

[Dewey Finn]

Thus, having not received the renewal email, I let the matter slide until I later learned I had missed the deadline.
This is what I don't understand. Why were you waiting for the "renewal email?" You can renew at any time before the deadline.

[Man With a Cat]

I cannot believe how petty some complaints are.
(Emphasis added by Shodan.)

Regards,
Shodan

Yes you can, you just don't want to, you disingenuous guy!!!

[TubaDiva]

Ambushed, I don't set the rules for Charter Membership around here.

No one on the staff does. We do what management dictates.

Management sets the rules on Charter Membership criteria. We enforce it.

In past versions of the vB software administrators couldn't move any registration back into the Charter Membership database -- the system would not allow it.

In the current version of the vB software apparently administrators CAN make this move -- but we are not allowed to unless Ed Zotti or Jerry Davis approves it. So far I think I've seen ONE instance where this happened -- and IIRC we allowed it because the user was serving in Iraq and had no internet access. That's one exception and a worthy one. Otherwise management has denied all requests.

Ed and Jerry have always said that if you allow Charter Membership to expire, the deal is off and the game is over. The tail does not wag the dog here -- like every other staffer I work here, I don't set policy.

[MOIDALIZE]

I'd take this rant more seriously if it was from an actual Charter Member, because we all know how important that is.

[E-Sabbath]

When is resubscribe time, anyhow? Spring, right?

[Jimmy Joe Meager]

So I spent weeks scouring my old hard drives and old Internet archives for such proof...Is it really that important? To you?

To anyone?

[SmartAleq]

One fast visit to the 'Raffe (http://www.giraffeboards.com/memberlist.php) and a check on the custom titles several members are sporting (there's actually a game going on where we pass custom titles to each other, among other things) would let anyone with a lick of sense know that yes, the titles CAN be changed. Anyone with administrator privs can do it. Why TPTB around here don't want to do it is a mystery for the ages.

[Maus Magill]

When is resubscribe time, anyhow? Spring, right?

Sometime in spring. I usually re-up at the beginning of March.

[Dewey Finn]

One fast visit to the 'Raffe (http://www.giraffeboards.com/memberlist.php) and a check on the custom titles several members are sporting (there's actually a game going on where we pass custom titles to each other, among other things) would let anyone with a lick of sense know that yes, the titles CAN be changed. Anyone with administrator privs can do it. Why TPTB around here don't want to do it is a mystery for the ages.Here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11210789&postcount=98) is a post in which TubaDiva explained in detail why once a charter membership is gone, it can't be easily restored.

[Giraffe]

Here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11210789&postcount=98) is a post in which TubaDiva explained in detail why once a charter membership is gone, it can't be easily restored.
Yes, I was originally under the impression that the SDMB was using only the built-in vB subscription system, in which case restoring charter status would be trivial, but it appears things are set up whereby a script overrules any changes made by the vB admins in terms of title and usergroup based on payment status. So, they could give you a Charter Member title, but it wouldn't last out the day.

Also, I think the OP's complaint about the staff's language with respect to charter status is ridiculous.

[TubaDiva]

When is resubscribe time, anyhow? Spring, right?You can resubscribe at any time, you don't have to wait for anything.

The date a subscription expires can be checked in the user control panel.

Click "User CP" and then "Miscellaneous' and then "Paid Subscriptions."

You can renew from that page as well. The system uses PayPal to process the transaction but you do not need a PayPal account, you can use your credit card.

[Shodan]

Yes you can, you just don't want to, you disingenuous guy!!!Cite?

Regards,
Shodan

[BigT]

Is it really that important? To you?

To anyone?

Are you accusing the OP of lying?

[BigT]

In the current version of the vB software apparently administrators CAN make this move -- but we are not allowed to unless Ed Zotti or Jerry Davis approves it. So far I think I've seen ONE instance where this happened -- and IIRC we allowed it because the user was serving in Iraq and had no internet access. That's one exception and a worthy one. Otherwise management has denied all requests.

I remember one other time it got allowed: a guy sent in his registration on time, but, due to some flaw in the system, did not get credited. I believe the problem was on PayPal's end.

I take it you already tried to get Ambushed approved, since he is alleging the problem was also software based.

Anyways, if I remember correctly, management would rather us not have any charter members. They are participating in something akin to a white mutiny (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_mutiny) (thanks E-sabbath), only honoring the original agreement to the letter.

[TubaDiva]

No, I'm not -- he's alleging something that happened six months ago. NOW he wants something done?

He didn't resubscribe until a couple of months after his Charter Membership expired, even.

I've received the same ill-considered reply from a much stronger argument involving the fact that at the time my posts showed a change from "Charter Member" to "Guest", the board tech person reported that people were being misreported as "Guests" who were actually still "Charter Members" (and that people should be patient and wait to see if the matter resolved itself). Thus, having not received the renewal email, I let the matter slide until I later learned I had missed the deadline.

Can you show me where that happened? Because that's not how I remember the situation in May when Charter Memberships were expiring, not at all.

(Doesn't mean I couldn't be wrong -- I been wrong before and will doubtless be wrong again -- but I don't believe that's how things went down.)

It is incumbent upon everyone who subscribes to the Straight Dope to keep an eye on when that subscription expires. There was a lot of traffic on the board about this issue at resubscription time and people were sent emails in advance of their subscription expiring. (Not a lot of advance, I do admit -- but notices were sent.)

And no, I'm not authorized by management to change a user title like that .

[Rick]

No, I'm not -- he's alleging something that happened six months ago. NOW he wants something done?

He didn't resubscribe until a couple of months after his Charter Membership expired, even.
:eek:
I cannot believe the stones on some people around here. a couple of months? Not exactly a missed it by that much issue. The OP missed the charter renewal by a country mile.

This has to be the whinest OP I have read in a long, long time.
Would you like some cheese with that whine?

[BigT]

No, I'm not -- he's alleging something that happened six months ago. NOW he wants something done?

He didn't resubscribe until a couple of months after his Charter Membership expired, even.

Sorry, I didn't realize all the particulars. I thought maybe there was some odd circumstance that made his Charter Member status only go out around now.

I also wouldn't take it too personally. I think it's more of a frustration post than anything. A slight misunderstanding of someone's verbiage seems a lot bigger when you are frustrated at losing something you hold dear.

[TubaDiva]

Aw, I always hate it when people are unhappy and I can't do anything to make it better.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Yeah, we need a German word for that.

[Canadjun]

There was a lot of traffic on the board about this issue at resubscription time and people were sent emails in advance of their subscription expiring. (Not a lot of advance, I do admit -- but notices were sent.)

Some notices may have been sent. I didn't get one (and my e-mail address was and still is correct); judging from comments from other ex-Charter members I'm not the only one that didn't get a notice. Note that I'm not asking for reinstatement, just pointing out that not everyone got notices.

[ambushed]

First, I must say I'm always amused when "the wingers" feel so outraged by a post they consider to be trivial and petty that they feel it necessary to spend the time and effort to submit a trivial and petty post complaining about it. Always good for a laugh...

Second, what part of "Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status" is so confusing to so many of you? All the posts mocking me for trying to get my status restored at this late date are considerably more than a little pretty and absurd given the actual words of my OP.

The point of my OP is that the word "cannot" means that there is no way that something can be done. On its own, as Tuba repeatedly used it in this context, I can see no genuinely honest way it can be asserted to mean that something is against policy. If it is against policy, say that, not that it "cannot" be done. My point that using that word in place of an honest declaration is disingenuous stands. I've seen no hint of any intellectually honest rebuttal to that observation.

And TubaDiva is not the only person who misuses that word, which really is a disingenuous cop-out when used in that manner. It's been abused by plenty of others as an evasion to conceal the fact that someone can indeed do something but simply chooses not to do it (for whatever reason).

Here are just two among many examples from real life:

(1): A slimy company named Trilegiant tricked me (and a million or so other people) into a "free" membership in something that turned out not to be free at all. When I discovered I had been conned, I finally got through to the company (after 25-30 attempts) and demanded a refund. They replied that they "cannot" do what I asked. It was just as disingenuous for them as it is for Tuba. When I contacted the Attorney General and they contacted Trilegiant, it turned out that they could, in fact, do it after all and then did so.

(2): A credit card company wrote me that they were going to jack up my interest rate to effectively usurious levels at a date that corresponded with my normal payment date unless I chose to close the account. But then they messed around with the payment date such that I missed the magic date by one day. When I called them and asked them to close the account and leave the old interest rate in force, they sent me up and up the chain of command whereupon the high-ranking person emphatically insisted: "I cannot do that for you, sir". When I contacted the Attorney General and they contacted the company in question, it turned out that they could, in fact, do it after all and then did so.

Lesson? People should not use the word "cannot" when in reality it could indeed be done. If something is against policy, be honest enough to say so and do not hide behind that disingenuous evasion of claiming it "cannot" be done.

Here is just a small sampling of the background of this issue showing that I am far from alone in criticizing this disingenuous choice of words:

I have no doubt that an Admin could manually change the title under the member's name, but that would only change the title, not revert their subscription price.

99% of the complaints are about the lost title, not the extra 7 bucks. For some reason dopers are crazy about that title. TPTB have decided to draw a line in the sand around a stupid and arbitrary issue. But suggesting that you cannot change the CM title is disingenuous.

ETA - if you wanted to, you could change any and every title you wanted to CM. But you choose not to. That pisses a lot of people off. And suggesting you cannot is disingenuous.

I have just been assuming that they are saying "we can't do it" because that forestalls a lot of the complaints about "But I only missed the deadline by 2 hours/didn't get the email/was in a foreign country" etc. I have additionally been assuming that it's absolutely not true, because the idea that there is some kind of magical database that cannot be altered by human hands is a little bit ridiculous. I'm sure that if TPTB wanted to, they could rework the Charter Member database so that people could be moved back into it, or whatever. But the policy is that once you're out, you're out. I understand, but saying that it is physically impossible and beyond the ken of human understanding to be able to reinstate a Charter Member seems... silly. :)

And untruthful....

Oh fuck, never mind. You and Tuba are not going to actually answer the question, so what's the point of repeating it?

But for posterity's sake: If your customers want to retain their TITLE "Charter Member" can you please provide them this service?

So far as I am aware, the question has never been asked before. We've always assumed that "Charter Membership" meant the title, the lower fee, and the rights and privileges thereunto pertaining. We (mods and admins) have no power over the fees &c. We can do a title change. We will start discussion amongst the mods over whether we'd want to.

There would be some logisitical and procedural questions to overcome (for instance, how to verify that someone WAS indeed a legit "Charter Member") but let us discuss and see what we come up with.

... Possibly, you could argue that: Anyone who HAD the title "Charter Member" but lost it due to late payment, who continues to pay full membership price, should be given the title of "Charter Member." I see no justification whatsoever for someone who joins up today for the first time and pays membership dues and wants "Charter Member" title.

In the past, our perception has certainly been that people who lose "Charter Member" status are concerned about the loss of the status -- lower fees, etc -- and not just the title. ...

...

I don't know how many people there are who have lost status but would like the title; I don't know how difficult it will be to confirm that they had that status but lost it; and I don't know how often that title change will need to be redone (possibly every year at subscription renewal? ) The result of that discussion could be that this is a great deal of work on the part of the mods/admins, and that would be good reason to reject the concept... and will have nothing to do with "not being very bright" or "playing God." If it goes that way, it will have to do with us mods/admins being unpaid volunteer positions who are already way overworked.

[ambushed's note of 12/12/09: I watched this thread and general topic for some time without any announcement of a decision. It was after this apparent absence of a decision that I started gathering evidence of my Charter Membership to use in requesting that just the title be restored as Dex was talking about possibly allowing.]


All they failed to do was pay bang on time. This is the type of poster I believe Dex is referring back for discussion.

I've got some sympathy with late payers who lose the charter title. If I don't pay my electricity bill by the due date I get a reminder giving me seven days to pay. If I still don't cough up, the company gives seven days notice of disconnection. My service is not removed at the first available opportunity. I get fourteen days grace. Furthermore, I get letters rather than emails that could find their way into my spam folder. I am not, of course, suggesting that the SD sends letters to people who have failed to renew on time but, when pay to post first arrived, it might have been better to offer a period of grace whereby a poster could reinstate himself/herself as a Charter Member by paying within seven or 14 days.

It seem like your situation was more of a personal choice than a late payment.

No horse in this contest.

Which, of course, got us used to that being how it worked.

In any case, as I indicated in the other thread on the topic, having the title "Charter Member" is irrationally important to me for no obvious reason, and I will happily pay $15 a year for it (along with not seeing ads, being able to search, etc.).


But I'm very grumpy about the way the situation was handled.

Why not just charge a fee for manually changing the titles of those who are willing to pay it? Maybe a one time $25.00 fee to restore a CM title if it has expired? Or perhaps a $100.00 fee would allow for the time and resources needed to rework the database system that is preventing easy restoration of this membership level now. For that matter, why not offer a menu of titles for a price? ("Grand Poobah" for a one time fee of 250.00, or "Unca Cece's Favorite" for a one time fee of, say, One Billion Dollars). It seems the title, and the title alone, is worth something to many, I think the SDMB is missing a golden revenue stream if typing 2 words into a database under the members name could generate more revenue than the subscription itself.

Do you really expect us to believe this ? I don't.

That would be a really nice touch. As others have said, it's not the price (and what other rights ans privs were there? Did I miss out on the sanctioned orgies?), it's the title. I just want the title back.

AHunter3

Charter Member
Weenie

I frankly think this is a bunch of bunk. Those of us who have been here for nigh on 10 years now lose status because we happened to be on vacation when the membership lapsed, and now it can never be reinstated? I KNOW you can change the status for members, because this BB software allows it....other boards I've been a part of with this software change the status of people to a wide variety of things at their request ..so I'd be really interested in knowing why YOU can't do it. It honestly feels like a huge slap in the face.

Standard terms on bills are 30 days. Perfectly reasonably to expect that.

Some didn't receive an email for whatever reason, some while on vaca due to the short lead time, etc.

It's perfectly reasonable to expect to be notified 30 days in advance of a bill being due, like just about any other bill you get.

As for the "you should just remember it": Why? With about 38,172 things to remember, should we all duplicate what goes on in the computer systems of every entity with which we interact? No, that is absurd. It's a standard operating procedure (yes, I know, there are exceptions) to be notified 30 days in advance of a bill being due by the biller.

That's why people whine. Perfectly reasonable, doesn't mean they are guaranteed to get their way, [i]it just means some have a reasonable complaint.

... (Note to SDMB staff: My point here is not to make any judgements regarding how the board is run, I merely disagree with the world view that ignores the reality and complexity of life in favor of a simplistic black and white version). ...

Realistically it's a partnership, as is the relationship with the SDMB. There is some black and some white and various shades of grey in between. ...



And here's more proof that few critics here bothered to read the OP with care, such that not even TubaDiva bothered to read it with any care:

No, I'm not -- he's alleging something that happened six months ago. NOW he wants something done?
:: sigh ::

What part of "Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status" is so confusing to you, Tuba? Surely I have a right to expect you to read OPs more carefully, especially before being chastised by a senior authority for requesting something I actually had not requested, don't I?

He didn't resubscribe until a couple of months after his Charter Membership expired, even.
:: sigh ::

A request was made by Jerry (or whatever tech person was involved) that we didn't bother him with complaints about title changes because he was much too busy dealing with all the technical problems. He asked that we just wait it out and see if it fixes itself.

I was also waiting for Dex or whoever to publicly issue a decision. To the best of my knowledge (and I was watching for some time) that never happened.

As a result, I felt it was incumbent on me to substantiate my bona fides as a charter member, but my entire history since 1999 showed me to be a "guest" (as one would expect given how this software works), so I had to turn to external documentation. I discovered that nothing on my current hard disks or (apparently) in the Internet archives documented my status, so I was forced to spend a great deal of additional time trying to find such, which I eventually did. That was when I requested that just my title be restored, since I didn't care much about the lower price. I considered that a valid compromise.

And that was when you told me that you "cannot" do anything about it; that it was utterly beyond even your capabilities. After hearing that, can you blame me for thinking that nothing could be done at all? When I tried all that time later to purchase a regular membership, I did so on a lark. Since you told me that there was nothing that could be done, I was quite surprised to learn that that wasn't entirely true and that by paying for a membership at least restored my join date.

It is incumbent upon everyone who subscribes to the Straight Dope to keep an eye on when that subscription expires. There was a lot of traffic on the board about this issue at resubscription time and people were sent emails in advance of their subscription expiring. (Not a lot of advance, I do admit -- but notices were sent.)
Look, we paid you for a service; to deny any responsibility on the part of the SDMB whatsoever would make you a truly execrable service provider, and I certainly don't believe you deserve such criticism -- except if you try to deny all responsibility.

I am almost always ridiculously overburdened with responsibilities already, what with caring for two seriously ill parents and all the other heavy responsibilities I must bear. Is it really so much to ask that my service providers work with me and offer some reasonable flexibility when I fail to keep track of all my 38,172 (RaftPeople's estimate) responsibilities? Not one other of my service provider's rules are as draconian as that!

And as many have pointed out, many of us did not receive the renewal email. Pointing out that there are other alternatives, especially after the fact (as has been overwhelmingly the case) is simply not good enough.

Why? Because with all of my responsibilities, I can almost never afford to take the time to browse around and visit ATMB or even the header of each forum during renewal season (although I only now know I can renew at any time). All I usually ever have time for is reading and responding to threads in which I've made comments. To do that, I go directly to search for my username to see where I am due to issue replies. That being the case, I would not see forum headers or visit ATMB. Going out of my way to check these locations should not be a hard and fast requirement to maintain a membership; the SDMB should bear much more responsibility than that.

But again, my purpose here is simply to point out that using the word "cannot" is disingenuous.

And no, I'm not authorized by management to change a user title like that .
There! Was that really so hard to say in place of "cannot" do it? Sheesh!

[DrDeth]

Second, what part of "Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status" is so confusing to so many of you? All the posts mocking me for trying to get my status restored at this late date are considerably more than a little pretty and absurd given the actual words of my OP.



"the actual words" are not necessarily the truth. Perhaps they simply do not believe your words, protestations to the contrary or not.

[Richard Pearse]

Using cannot in this way is pretty standard English, I don't see what the problem is.

[ianzin]

I've just read post #27, above. Surely the problem here is that ambushed just hasn't provided enough background detail and citations to back up his case. If only people would bother to assemble some evidence before arguing their case.

Okay, okay, I apologise for the sarcasm but... seriously... Let It Go. This level of attention to a point that is over and done with just isn't healthy. Look, understand the message as either 'cannot for technical reasons' or 'cannot for policy reasons', but either way it's not going to change. Life is rich and wonderful, go and start appreciating and enjoying some of it.

[C K Dexter Haven]

The point of my OP is that the word "cannot" means that there is no way that something can be done.
From www.dictionary.com:can
–auxiliary verb
1. to be able to; have the ability, power, or skill to: She can solve the problem easily, I'm sure.
2. to know how to: He can play chess, although he's not particularly good at it.
3. to have the power or means to: A dictator can impose his will on the people.
4. to have the right or qualifications to: He can change whatever he wishes in the script.
5. may; have permission to: Can I speak to you for a moment?
6. to have the possibility: A coin can land on either side. Sorry, ambushed, but your definition seems to be only number 6.

I am sorry that no one got back to you, it was some time ago and I dont remember the details. I do know that the decision was that we could not do it. I don't recollect whether "could not" meant that we did not have the power, or knowledge, or means, or right, or permission.

[Smeghead]

Holy crap. There's a big internet out there. Go have some fun.

[Fenris]

[quote]As a result, I felt it was incumbent on me to substantiate my bona fides as a charter member, but my entire history since 1999 showed me to be a "guest" (as one would expect given how this software works), so I had to turn to external documentation. I discovered that nothing on my current hard disks or (apparently) in the Internet archives documented my status, so I was forced to spend a great deal of additional time trying to find such, which I eventually did. That was when I requested that just my title be restored, since I didn't care much about the lower price. I considered that a valid compromise.
So...you have 37,172 "responsibilities", but you had "a great deal of time" to comb through....something...to find proof of...something else? Hmmm..

I am almost always ridiculously overburdened with responsibilities already, what with caring for two seriously ill parents and all the other heavy responsibilities I must bear. Is it really so much to ask that my service providers work with me and offer some reasonable flexibility when I fail to keep track of all my 38,172 (RaftPeople's estimate) responsibilities?
Yes.

Because while you only have 38,172 specific responsibilities, they have, let's say 800 members with 38,172 responsibilities each. Some might even have 38,174! :eek: !

Also...key point here: You're not a unique snowflake who's is the only person EVER who's had/has responsibilities and they're not your goddamned nanny.


Why? Because with all of my responsibilities, I can almost never afford to take the time to browse around and visit ATMB or even the header of each forum during renewal season (although I only now know I can renew at any time). All I usually ever have time for is reading and responding to threads in which I've made comments.
How do you make comments if you don't browse the threads? How do you manage to find threads to leave your droppings of wisdom in in the first place? Clearly some browsing is going on.

Also: time management tip here: You might have more time to read the board if you didn't spend "a great deal of time" looking for proof of...something and harassing the District Attorney while you try to file nuisance lawsuits..

To do that, I go directly to search for my username to see where I am due to issue replies. That being the case, I would not see forum headers or visit ATMB. Going out of my way to check these locations should not be a hard and fast requirement to maintain a membership; the SDMB should bear much more responsibility than that.
Did I mention rule #1: The SDMB is not your nanny? At least when I registered, there was a part that mentioned that you WERE required to check ATMB once in a while. And even if it's not still in the registration agreement, it's takes a few seconds to check. And I'm pretty sure they put "renewal time" stickies in all forums.

Oh...and did I mention that the SDMB isn't your nanny? It won't wipe your nose when you sneeze and it won't wipe your ass when you poo.

I think Chicago Reader's (yeah, I know, but I don't remember who owns the SDMB this week) current policy is stupid--they could make a boodle (a boodle= ~350/500 member who'd cough up $15.00/year to get moved to a new user group that had a charter member title , not see ads and nothing else.) It would be about 12 seconds work on Jerry's part. But your posts are getting me to the point where I'm wanting to reflexively side with them and have your title changed to "Whiner" or something.

Finally, what part of "cannot can mean procedurally as well as technically" don't you get? If an underage kid tries to buy booze, despite it being against the law, the clerk is 100% accurate in saying "I cannot sell you booze (because the law doesn't permit me to)". It's certainly technically possible for him to sell to the kid--kid hands him money, clerk hands him booze. But "cannot" is still accurate. So, really. Get over it.

[ambushed]

So because TubaDiva chooses to employ disingenuous and evasive language, I'm being openly called a liar and the personal abuse against me is amped up beyond anything I've ever seen outside the pit.

I thought there were rules here. This how you run your shop, Tuba? Let the dogs run loose to ignore the rules because your pride was pinged a bit?

And the rest of you: Such fair-minded, sober, clear-thinking comments. Proud of yourselves, are you?

[Fenris]

And the rest of you: Such fair-minded, sober, clear-thinking comments. Proud of yourselves, are you?

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but yes. Even with 38,987.3 responsibilities, I found time to post a perfectly legal/legit post in ATMB which should, if you can squeeze time to read it into your 38,432 reponsibilties should give you some guidance as to how to deal with things...including your previous post.

In response to this

I thought there were rules here.
There are. But because you don't read ATMB, you don't apparently know what they are. Sarcasm is just fine here.

This how you run your shop, Tuba? Let the dogs run loose to ignore the rules because your pride was pinged a bit?
Remember rule #1: The SDMB is not your nanny. Running to the mods because people are disagreeing with (and laughing at) your silly, whiny, over-the-top hysterical posts is akin to asking the SDMB to wipe your butt after you make poopies.

And you still haven't responded to all the people who've pointed out that "cannot" can mean that you can't do something because of procedures/standards/laws/rule.

[ambushed]

From www.dictionary.com:Sorry, ambushed, but your definition seems to be only number 6.

I am sorry that no one got back to you, it was some time ago and I dont remember the details. I do know that the decision was that we could not do it. I don't recollect whether "could not" meant that we did not have the power, or knowledge, or means, or right, or permission.So you choose the word "can" rather than "cannot" to cite the definition and assert that that's somehow close enough. Here are usage examples (from: here (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cannot)):

Usage notes

Cannot is frequently but mistakenly written as can not, yet these have quite different meanings. In cannot (or can't), the particle not is related to can, whereas in can not the particle not is related to the verb following can. Consider the following remarks about squares on a chess-board:

* A chess square can be white. This is true.
* A chess square can not be white. This is also true, since it can equally be black. ( = A chess square is able to be not white.)
* A chess square cannot be white. This is false. ( = A chess square is unable to be white.)
* A chess square cannot be red. This is true (on any normal board). ( = A chess square is unable to be red.)

[ambushed]

:eek:
I cannot believe the stones on some people around here. a couple of months? Not exactly a missed it by that much issue. The OP missed the charter renewal by a country mile.

This has to be the whinest OP I have read in a long, long time.
Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Oh grow up. I explained all that. Jerry asked us not to bother him or TPTB and to just wait and see if it fixed itself. And my request to restore the title was roughly 6 months ago. This OP was clearly not an attempt to revisit that decision, as any careful and intellectually honest reading of my OP would reveal. My OP was a complaint about evasive and disingenuous language, that's all.

[Lute Skywatcher]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tdsL4kvp_I

[ambushed]

[QUOTE=ambushed;11879734]

So...you have 37,172 "responsibilities", but you had "a great deal of time" to comb through....something...to find proof of...something else? Hmmm..


Yes.

Because while you only have 38,172 specific responsibilities, they have, let's say 800 members with 38,172 responsibilities each. Some might even have 38,174! :eek: !

Also...key point here: You're not a unique snowflake who's is the only person EVER who's had/has responsibilities and they're not your goddamned nanny.


How do you make comments if you don't browse the threads? How do you manage to find threads to leave your droppings of wisdom in in the first place? Clearly some browsing is going on.

Also: time management tip here: You might have more time to read the board if you didn't spend "a great deal of time" looking for proof of...something and harassing the District Attorney while you try to file nuisance lawsuits..


Did I mention rule #1: The SDMB is not your nanny? At least when I registered, there was a part that mentioned that you WERE required to check ATMB once in a while. And even if it's not still in the registration agreement, it's takes a few seconds to check. And I'm pretty sure they put "renewal time" stickies in all forums.

Oh...and did I mention that the SDMB isn't your nanny? It won't wipe your nose when you sneeze and it won't wipe your ass when you poo.

I think Chicago Reader's (yeah, I know, but I don't remember who owns the SDMB this week) current policy is stupid--they could make a boodle (a boodle= ~350/500 member who'd cough up $15.00/year to get moved to a new user group that had a charter member title , not see ads and nothing else.) It would be about 12 seconds work on Jerry's part. But your posts are getting me to the point where I'm wanting to reflexively side with them and have your title changed to "Whiner" or something.

Finally, what part of "cannot can mean procedurally as well as technically" don't you get? If an underage kid tries to buy booze, despite it being against the law, the clerk is 100% accurate in saying "I cannot sell you booze (because the law doesn't permit me to)". It's certainly technically possible for him to sell to the kid--kid hands him money, clerk hands him booze. But "cannot" is still accurate. So, really. Get over it.
"Cannot" is not now and never was "accurate" in this context, and your insulting load of calumnies and abusive mockery crossed lines that should not be crossed by someone with any self-respect.

If you had a valid objection, you would have made it far less abusively. It is clear you had no valid objection, since you decided to substitute extremely insulting mockery in lieu of such a point.

And I'll pass along your "fuck you" to my dying parents in extreme pain. That should cheer them up.

[Kal]

Same cite as mentioned in post #36:

cannot

1. can not ( = am/is/are unable to); contracted into can't (see the usage notes)

I cannot open the window. It is stuck.

2. am/are/is forbidden, not permitted to

You cannot enter the hall without a ticket.


Usage:

TubaDiva cannot change titles back to Charter Member because she is not permitted to.

Admins cannot change titles back to Charter Member because they are forbidden to do so.

[ambushed]

I've seen pile-ons before, but sheesh. I've seen pile-on threads closed far more quickly than this. Isn't having a poster call another a liar in ATMB against the rules? Funny that hasn't been acted upon.

[Fenris]

Where were you called a liar?

Also, where did I say "fuck you" to your dying parents or you? (quote marks yours, not mine. Cite the quote)

[jjimm]

Good grief.

[TubaDiva]

This is turning into a train wreck here and nothing useful is being accomplished.

For the sake of humanity if any Charter Members are reading this -- please resubscribe as soon as possible -- you don't have to wait until your subscription nearly runs out.

This is meaningful because once a Charter Member subscription is allowed to lapse it cannot be reinstated.

It's a blistering $7.48 a year. Someone can help you pay it if you need assistance, ask in ATMB.

Once again: Once a Charter Member lapses due to nonpayment the game is over. Once expired it cannot be renewed.

The staff is not able to grant Ambushed's wish in this matter. This is not a personal choice but is administrators and moderators doing as directed by management.