The word "fuck" is not against the rulrs

[samclem]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Too bad -- I am the Golden Doper, worm. BOW BEFORE ME!!!

I always thought that Eve was the Golden doper.

[Cat Whisperer]

I feel a title change coming on...

[Cheshire Human]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Too bad -- I am the Golden Doper, worm. BOW BEFORE ME!!!

And shit...

[Autolycus]

Are the rulrs metric or imperial?

[Cheshire Human]

Originally Posted by Autolycus

Are the rulrs metric or imperial?

Neither. We are trying out a new standard. Do you like it? Its called the "and shit"....

[Autolycus]

Originally Posted by Cheshire Human

Neither. We are trying out a new standard. Do you like it? Its called the "and shit"....

Yeah, it's just super.

[Cheshire Human]

Originally Posted by Autolycus

Yeah, it's just super.

The proper term is not "super", it's "uber". Get with the program, here, dude!

[MTCicero]

Originally Posted by Cheshire Human

The proper term is not "super", it's "uber". Get with the program, here, dude!

I would think it would be über. Because how could you leave off the umlaut?

[Irishman]

154 posts before we got the rulrs joke? Impressive.

[Autolycus]

Originally Posted by Cheshire Human

The proper term is not "super", it's "uber". Get with the program, here, dude!

Whoosh, and shit.

[elbows]

How can you join a board, governed by the rule 'don't be a jerk', and not understand that the application of such a rule is going to be both subjective and ill defined? Seriously.

How can you not understand that, from time to time, interpretation of what constitutes, 'being a jerk', is going to be disputed? And that when that happens the moderators get to make the call.

Not because they have jackboots, or are trying to piss you off, but because, by joining, we've agreed to grant them this position.

I understand, after what you wrote about your situation, that life is indeed trying for you. But please understand that no one gets special consideration because, they are detoxing, in the middle of a divorce, just lost a child or whatever. Understandably so, as anyone could claim such things, anytime they wish. Which is not to say we don't believe you, please understand.

I have also been completely housebound and relied on this amazing board as a connection to the outside world, so I understand why it's so important to you, really. But that doesn't change that you really do need to step back and get a little perspective, calm down, shake it off and move on.

[BigT]

Wow. I've got a lot to respond to. May take me few years [actually took a few hours]

PLEASE READ IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH, as some of you seem to be assuming things I haven't said or ignoring things I have.

First, to everyone: I'm already not really mad anymore. Disappointed? Yes. Frustrated? Yes. Mad? No. There's no reason to tell me to step away. I've commented in other threads. Check my "tone" there if you don't believe me.

Originally Posted by Angry Lurker

Can't you think of it in your mind as a citation?

I already do. You misunderstand. The problem is that other people want to tell me "it's just a warning" when it isn't. I'm objecting to people telling me I should just view it as such.

Originally Posted by twickster

It's not a new rule. The rule is "don't be a jerk," and when you lash out in an angry, nasty, personal fashion -- with or without obscenities -- in an IMHO thread, you're being a jerk.

Too bad he didn't cite me for that. He said LANGUAGE, and then agreed with Melon that he meant TONE rather than language. Neither of which are against the rules. This is quite evident in this thread alone, let alone plenty of other threads, including various posts by me.

That's part of the reason this bugs me so much. I've made similar and worse posts before and not gotten as much as a Mod Note. This Citation came from out of nowhere. And I think the fact that I had a previous Citation on my record played a part in that.

I've said before that "Don't be a jerk" is a lousy rule because it doesn't specify what a jerk is. So the problem remains: how can you expect someone not to be something if you don't tell them what actions amount to that?

MeanOldLady mentions the definition that I was working under. That was the rule, and now it has been changed. Any other time I'd applaud the change. But not when the change retroactively applies.

My past history should make it clear that I would have objected if it had happened to someone else. The only difference was in how angry I allowed it to make me.

Originally Posted by Zoe

But even if it were there until my last day on earth, having just one warning would be a little like that "Unsatisfactory" that I got in Chapel Attendance in college years ago. I bring up that and the disciplinary probation to impress my grandchildren.

BTW, I hadn't read about your withdrawal when I posted last time. That's something I haven't gone through. That must be rough and probably explains a lot. That might be something that we could talk about in another forum if you like. That's your call.

Because no one has told me I was wrong that my previous Citation was part of why I was not afforded the benefit of the doubt in this one.

As mentioned to twicks, I've made similar posts out of anger, and have not been called on it.

BTW, thanks for responding the way you did earlier. While I disagreed with some of what you said, the way you responded is how I think a moderator should be. Not condescending, not dictatorial.

As for another thread about my withdrawal, we'll see.

Originally Posted by Munch

You are delusional if you truly believe any of what you just said. No - everyone does not "understand your tone" - we see it as needless whining and a failure to see what you did wrong. And there are many posters on this board who would rather see the moderation "tone" return to Coldfire levels.

Wow, this is a pretty bad post. Let's take it from the top:

1. I didn't say anything about "understanding my tone." Please reread carefully. I'm saying they understand why I am upset. Clearly you do too, or your Coldfire reference would not make a lick of sense.

2. In a thread about hostility, you call someone delusional and use a deliberately hostile tone. Brilliant.

3. I've already admitted I understand what I did wrong. I merely disagree with how I was moderated. I've said this often enough now, that I question if you actually have read enough of the thread to warrant making comments.

4. If the mods returned to Coldfire levels, they'd have to ban themselves for being jerks.

Originally Posted by Colibri

He's already clarified, and other moderators have explained it too. There's no reason he needs to keep coming back to explain over and over again just because you refuse to accept his explanation.

No. You've clarified. Other Dopers have clarified. Czarcasm gave a terse response that didn't explain anything, and then refused to clarify. He claims that it wouldn't have helped, but, seeing as he didn't even try, he has no legitimate reason to believe that.

Then he came in, reasserted the above which still doesn't make sense, gave a response that accused me of trying to get special privileges, and asserted that I was either a liar or a spoiled brat. You had to come in and translate for him.

You may have had enough experience with the guy to understand what he means, but I don't. And I'm sure I'm not the only poster who doesn't. I know he has the ability to be 100% clear, but something about moderating inspires him to be more on the snark and less on the clarity.

Originally Posted by Frylock

I wouldn't expect a mod to fully explain every detail of this kind of thing when explaining moderation decisions because, frankly, to explain every detail would take a book, and this is the kind of thing we all just pick up as we go along. In fact, a lot of it is understood unconsciously and through barely-spoken social convention--the kind of thing that constitutes genuine norms, but which could hardly be effectively codified.

Picking it up is much more efficient, in this case, than trying to learn it by heart from a book-length list of rules.

I disagree entirely. It is never more efficient to assume people understand things. Because the result is that there will be people who don't. The fact that a mere poster can explain it so easily indicates it is not hard.

That said, I picked up on the odd differences in forums. Except I don't see how IMHO is anywhere near the bottom. All it is is GD-lite. It's people debating things that don't qualify for GD. People get plenty angry there.

Originally Posted by Cat Whisperer

You make this sound like a difficult task, but I assure you, you aren't the only one who re-writes and tones things down before posting - I've been doing it for ten years, so it comes more automatically, but I still do it - I read over what I've written, and more often than not, I'll tone something down, keeping in mind that when all you have to go on is written word, it is very easy to take things harsher than they were meant, and I always assume that something will sound meaner than I meant it and attempt to prevent that.

It's not so much difficult as time consuming. As I have OCD, doing that stuff takes me hours, and I always feel like it only feeds my tendency to be obsessive. I hate doing it. I prefer the onus to be on the reader to assume the most positive possible interpretation.

As for anxiety/medication, I'll check it out. As for the explanation, it's wasted. There's a post above where I finally got why I was modded. I even started bawling when I figured it out, and mentioned that. I just disagree with part of it and how it was handled.

Oh, and walking nerve was nowhere near sufficient for me. I wasn't lying when I listed those symptoms, and it was worse when I first was getting off of them. Thing is, I've been here all this time, and not run into problems until recently. If anything, I was going through so much that I didn't bother when things bothered me.

Originally Posted by elbows

How can you join a board, governed by the rule 'don't be a jerk', and not understand that the application of such a rule is going to be both subjective and ill defined? Seriously.

How can you not understand that, from time to time, interpretation of what constitutes, 'being a jerk', is going to be disputed? And that when that happens the moderators get to make the call.

Not because they have jackboots, or are trying to piss you off, but because, by joining, we've agreed to grant them this position.

I understand, after what you wrote about your situation, that life is indeed trying for you. But please understand that no one gets special consideration because, they are detoxing, in the middle of a divorce, just lost a child or whatever. Understandably so, as anyone could claim such things, anytime they wish. Which is not to say we don't believe you, please understand.

I have also been completely housebound and relied on this amazing board as a connection to the outside world, so I understand why it's so important to you, really. But that doesn't change that you really do need to step back and get a little perspective, calm down, shake it off and move on.

Dude, you misunderstood. I was challenging Czarcasm's assertion that I'm either lying or spoiled/pampered. I have no illusions that I would get special privileges.

And as I've already pointed out, I'm over the anger. As for the "jerk" rule, when I first lurked here, I never saw it being used. I tried reporting a bunch of jerkish posts quite often (probably including the one Una remembers and I don't), and nothing was ever done. So I acclimated, got a tougher skin. Too bad mods have jackhammers.

And again I must point out that Czarcasm did not cite me using the Jerk rule.

Originally Posted by Cheshire Human

Ligten up, MoFo.... I got 2 "warnings" within the first week I was here! "Warning"s ain't the end of the world. "Warnings" ain't gonna kill ya... "Warning" does NOT indicate "Hypocrite".....


and shit.

You, sir, are no SuperK. And careful using such a "hostile" word as MoFo.

Originally Posted by Autolycus

Are the rulrs metric or imperial?

Finally somebody noticed. Jeez, people. I thought I was on a different message board.

Oh, and neither. They have a few lines on them, and then one really long bendable one that covers everything else.

[Rushgeekgirl]

I'm glad you're not angry anymore BigT.

[twickster]

Closed at the request of the OP.

[Gfactor]

In this thread: Re: Closure of the Big T thread I said:

Originally Posted by Gfactor

The OP has indicated that she is done. I will close this thread in twelve hours unless someone objects.If anyone wants the same done with thread that this thread discusses, please let me know.

Gfactor
Moderator

I've received no requests yet, but it is possible that some of the posters in this thread aren't following the other one. Also, my note was less than clear about the status of this thread. So I will reopen this thread for 12 hours from now (really a bit more, because I don't get up at 5:15 am). Anyone who wishes to respond may do so. If anyone objects to the thread closure, please let me know.

Gfactor
Moderator

[Fenris]

Ok.

I object to the thread closure. What possible reason to close it is there? What does it hurt to leave it open?

I strongly feel that unless there's an overwhelming reason (illegal acts being discussed, actual real-world threats) there's never, ever a reason to close a thread.

While I don't really care about the issue here, there's a principle at stake. Turn the question around: the default position of the mods shouldn't be "Dopers, convince me to keep this thread open", the default position should be "Hell no--I don't care if you want it closed, you made your bed, now lie in it. You want it closed, show me an overwhelming reason I should."

[Rushgeekgirl]

BigT is a she?

[AClockworkMelon]

Originally Posted by Rushgeekgirl

BigT is a she?

No, elbows is. She's the OP of the Closure of the BigT thread.

[the lone cashew]

Originally Posted by Fenris

I object to the thread closure. What possible reason to close it is there? What does it hurt to leave it open?

I strongly feel that unless there's an overwhelming reason (illegal acts being discussed, actual real-world threats) there's never, ever a reason to close a thread.

While I don't really care about the issue here, there's a principle at stake. Turn the question around: the default position of the mods shouldn't be "Dopers, convince me to keep this thread open", the default position should be "Hell no--I don't care if you want it closed, you made your bed, now lie in it. You want it closed, show me an overwhelming reason I should."

This my opinion also.

[Rushgeekgirl]

Originally Posted by AClockworkMelon

No, elbows is. She's the OP of the Closure of the BigT thread.

Ohhh....I swear I feel like Edith Bunker some days.

[Gfactor]

Originally Posted by Fenris

Ok.

I object to the thread closure. What possible reason to close it is there? What does it hurt to leave it open?

I get that you object to thread closure in general. I'll be happy to discuss that with you. But, as I'm sure you are aware, the Lost finale is tonight. I'm going to be at a friend's place watching the show until late, and I'm busy during the day tomorrow. I'm not sure this is the place to go into your general objections, but I'll respond to you somewhere, at some point tomorrow.

G

[Zoe]

I have had my say in this thread and am satisfied that BigT and I are at a basic understanding or acceptance.

I would like to see threads left open at least for a period of 24 hours for those who have a routine of being on the computer only for a few hours during a certain time of day. I am on at this time of day only because it is the weekend.

Thank you very much, Gfactor, for your action.

But overall I am in agreement with Fenris about "why close this thread?" That is a little like saying that Holmes and Moriarity have a beer together and bury the axe.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by Gfactor

I get that you object to thread closure in general. I'll be happy to discuss that with you. But, as I'm sure you are aware, the Lost finale is tonight. I'm going to be at a friend's place watching the show until late, and I'm busy during the day tomorrow. I'm not sure this is the place to go into your general objections, but I'll respond to you somewhere, at some point tomorrow.

G

Take yer time buddy. LOST is far more important than this--I just wanted to state my objection. Like I said, other than the general principle, I got no dog in this hunt, so it's not like I'm gonna have a cow if you don't respond immediately.

Namaste

[Munch]

Wow, this is a pretty bad post. Let's take it from the top:

1. I didn't say anything about "understanding my tone." Please reread carefully. I'm saying they understand why I am upset. Clearly you do too, or your Coldfire reference would not make a lick of sense.

2. In a thread about hostility, you call someone delusional and use a deliberately hostile tone. Brilliant.

3. I've already admitted I understand what I did wrong. I merely disagree with how I was moderated. I've said this often enough now, that I question if you actually have read enough of the thread to warrant making comments.

4. If the mods returned to Coldfire levels, they'd have to ban themselves for being jerks.

1. My bad - I meant "understand your explanation".
2. Big deal - stop whining just because I know where the line is and you don't. "Hostility" isn't banned around here - your tone was way beyond hostility, and totally out of place in that thread. Context matters - it can't all be looked at with some formulaic equation to determine it's jerkish. Your desire to have "don't be a jerk" clearly laid out and absolutely defined simply isn't going to happen.
3. Then let it go already.

Seriously - let it go. You're arguing against Rule #1, the rule that's been the main guiding principle of a 10+ year old message board - the board you claim you've developed a symbiotic relationship with. Fighting against that rule is not going to end well.

[AClockworkMelon]

BigT's inability to understand tone and context seems almost indicative of Asperger's Syndrome. I'm not surprised at all that the post in question was flagged. I would have expected a mod note rather than an official warning but that's up to the moderators' discretion.

[Gfactor]

Originally Posted by Gfactor

In this thread: Re: Closure of the Big T thread I said:


I've received no requests yet, but it is possible that some of the posters in this thread aren't following the other one. Also, my note was less than clear about the status of this thread. So I will reopen this thread for 12 hours from now (really a bit more, because I don't get up at 5:15 am). Anyone who wishes to respond may do so. If anyone objects to the thread closure, please let me know.

Gfactor
Moderator

1. More than 12 hours have elapsed since I made this post.
2. We have received no specific objections to the proposed closure.
3. Therefore I am closing this thread.
4. Two posters voiced about thread closures in general. I've indicated that I would discuss these objections.
5. I will start a thread here in the ATMB forum for that discussion. I'll edit this thread to add a link when I've started the thread.

Gfactor
Moderator

ETA: Here is the thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...1#post12491751