A question to C K Dexter Haven on the art of the insult in GD

[magellan01]

C K Dexter Haven,

I placed this here in GD and not The Pit because it is a serious question that I'd like to handle seriously, not fliply. And it seems there is a debate as to what does and does not constitute a violation of the GD rules.

In this thread you were kind enough to weigh in on an accusation that I made against tomndebb concerning an insult. I'll post what you offered and then ask my question.

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

Administrator interjects:
Magellan01: I have looked into this situation -- fairly quickly, I admit, since there are three pages of posts -- and I do not see that tomndeb has violated either forum rules or board rules. There is a careful distinction between "You appear to have said..." and "You are..." He is not attacking you as a person, he is attacking what you said.

Thank you for your input here. But I don't think this is how GD has been moderated in the past. I would also point out that your explanation does NOT seem to address what was said. I bring your attention to the words "you" and "who".

Originally Posted by tomndebb

I am hardly going to warn you or threaten you with banning for being an incompetent debater who distorts what has been posted on a thread or throws odd red herrings into the discussion.

(bolding mine)

Also, I don't see where something along the lines of "appears to have said" (emphasis mine) is present or relevant.

That said, based on the explanation you provided, which of these would be allowed? Which worthy of a warning or admonishment? And why? Please note that ALL of them adhere to the distinction you made above: they all focus the comment on what has been said, not who said it.

1) What you said is stupid.
2) Everything you have said is stupid.
3) Everything you say is stupid.
4) The stuff coming out of your mouth is completely asinine.
5) The stuff you say is completely asinine.
6) I am hardly going to report you for being an incompetent moderator who lies and distorts what has been said. I have better things to do.
7) I'm not going to report you for the lies, distortions and stupidity that you type. It would do no good.
8) I won't comment on the dumbfuck posts you continue to spawn.
9) Why do you keep spewing these lies and stupidity? Your posts in this thread imply a severe lack of education and gross stupidity.
10) That is the dumbest, most dishonest thing I have ever read on these boards.
11) I'm hardly going to respond to a poster that types such stupid shit.
12) You have just typed the dumbest thing I have ever seen.
13) That's the kind of post I'd expect from a poster that consistently posts stupid shit.

Again, they all point to what has been said. So, are these all allowed in GD? Please be specific, because your explanation will doubt be used to artfully craft insults in the future. Perhaps even by a Moderator.

[MEBuckner]

Moderator's Note: The BBQ Pit is the place for all "complaints and other discussion regarding administration of the SDMB" (which is what this thread clearly is).

[El_Kabong]

Dear moderators: if you don't mind, could you please define just how much of a hostile, hectoring jerk I can can get away with being in GD without getting myself banned? Thanks in advance.

[RedFury]

Whaaaaa! Tom's a meanie and wears jackboots!

[El_Kabong]

Originally Posted by RedFury

Tom's a meanie and wears jackboots!

And nothing else. So I'm told. I wouldn't know one way or another.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by RedFury

Whaaaaa! Tom's a meanie and wears jackboots!

What's REALLY kinky is that they're TVeblen's old jackboots.

[Frank]

Originally Posted by El_Kabong

And nothing else. So I'm told. I wouldn't know one way or another.

The less said about the last meeting at the Mod's Secret Enclave of Doom, the better.

Well, I will say that we didn't let him play Musical Chairs with the rest of us.

[GIGObuster]

I saw this thread before:

Doper: discusses “A”

OP: mentions “A” was caused by “B” (with an aside that mentions “Y”)

Doper: “B” was not a correct assumption, “Y” was already discussed and dismissed before.

OP: You are insulting for bringing “Y” into the discussion!

4 pages of Argumentum ad Nauseam follows to demonstrate what an insult that was. It does not matter what “Y” was, the faith of the nation hangs in denouncing the assumed insult!

“A” is ignored, Mission Accomplished!

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Ah, now that you've finally arrived in the pit in connection with the thread about the asswhuping of the Republicans ("SDMB Conservatives: Go Reclaim Your Party"), I can tell you what I think of your personal attacks in GD.

You are a whining, pathetic little puss. So you're whimpering that the Republicans took it up the keister? Boo fucking hoo. Why don't you take a break and quit flailing all over the boards? All you are doing with your extended temper tantrum is solidifying the impression that you are a major league asshole, and a moronic one at that.

[Scotticher]

And *I* think that this is an excellent illustration of the kind of thing that would violate the rules of Great Debates.

But not the Pit.

I hope you see the difference, magellan01?

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

Ah, now that you've finally arrived in the pit in connection with the thread about the asswhuping of the Republicans ("SDMB Conservatives: Go Reclaim Your Party"), I can tell you what I think of your personal attacks in GD.

You are a whining, pathetic little puss. So you're whimpering that the Republicans took it up the keister? Boo fucking hoo. Why don't you take a break and quit flailing all over the boards? All you are doing with your extended temper tantrum is solidifying the impression that you are a major league asshole, and a moronic one at that.

Nice. Has a beat and I can dance to it. 8/10. Woulda been a 9/10, but you neglected to call him a fuckwit.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

Ah, now that you've finally arrived in the pit in connection with the thread about the asswhuping of the Republicans ("SDMB Conservatives: Go Reclaim Your Party"), I can tell you what I think of your personal attacks in GD.

Cite, please. Go into that thread and show me these horrid personal insults. And while you're at it, show me the warnings or admonishments I, no-doubetdly, received for such insults.

Either that, or I'll have to conclude you're simply lying. You'll forgive me that I'm not shocked.

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

You are a whining, pathetic little puss. So you're whimpering that the Republicans took it up the keister?

Is this what you consider "whimpering that the Republicans took it up the keister"?

Originally Posted by magellan01

I think this is a good thing for the country. To alter what Airman Doors said, the republicans need a break from power. This slap will hopefully cause them to wake up and get back to conservatism.

The democrats will not be able to simply complain and point out fault, and will have to offer concrete solutions. The move to the middle will hopefully cause the majority to slap down Conyers and other extremists.

I really think that, as unpalatable as some of this might be in the coming year to conservatives like myself, it is a good thing for both parties and the country.

Congratulations to all who were hoping for or worked towrd this.

That is my intial post in its entirety. I had also intended it to be mt last post in that thread. Alas, that was not to be. "Whimpering". I don't see it. Someone trying to be gracious in loss and congratulate his opponent? A little more so.

Schmuck.




Oops. Make that "Schmuck and liar."

[kaylasdad99]

Originally Posted by magellan01

1) What you said is stupid.
2) Everything you have said is stupid.
3) Everything you say is stupid.
4) The stuff coming out of your mouth is completely asinine.
5) The stuff you say is completely asinine.
6) I am hardly going to report you for being an incompetent moderator who lies and distorts what has been said. I have better things to do.
7) I'm not going to report you for the lies, distortions and stupidity that you type. It would do no good.
8) I won't comment on the dumbfuck posts you continue to spawn.
9) Why do you keep spewing these lies and stupidity? Your posts in this thread imply a severe lack of education and gross stupidity.
10) That is the dumbest, most dishonest thing I have ever read on these boards.
11) I'm hardly going to respond to a poster that types such stupid shit.
12) You have just typed the dumbest thing I have ever seen.
13) That's the kind of post I'd expect from a poster that consistently posts stupid shit.

Pretty impressive collection, magellan01. Did you pick those all up on your own over the years, or were some of them borrowed from Clothahump's dance card?

I dood it!

[Zoe]

Magellan01: Your explanation will doubt be used to artfully craft insults in the future.

If your desire is to insult, why not just stick with the Pit? I can see your challenging someone in GD if what they have stated contradicts the truth, but that doesn't have to be done with invective.

I'm curious about the name-calling that you used to address Tom in GD. That seemed really beneath you. It made you seem malicious even though the names themselves were kind of silly.

You are better than this.

[Sage Rat]

Well obviously, some of these will depend on context, but righty-o:

1) What you said is stupid. -- Critique. Allowed (assuming you follow it with an explication of course)
2) Everything you have said is stupid. -- Blatant dismissal of anything you don't agree with. Probably allowed, but essentially it just shows that you've no desire to actually debate anything
3) Everything you say is stupid. -- Insult. Not allowed
4) The stuff coming out of your mouth is completely asinine. Insult
5) The stuff you say is completely asinine. Depends on context. Could be the same as #1 or #3
6) I am hardly going to report you for being an incompetent moderator who lies and distorts what has been said. I have better things to do. -- Pointless. Amuses other dopers at your expense, so allowed to sit
7) I'm not going to report you for the lies, distortions and stupidity that you type. It would do no good. -- Insult.
8) I won't comment on the dumbfuck posts you continue to spawn. -- Insult
9) Why do you keep spewing these lies and stupidity? Your posts in this thread imply a severe lack of education and gross stupidity. -- Insult that also works like #2, so a double whammy
10) That is the dumbest, most dishonest thing I have ever read on these boards. -- Critique. Allowed (assuming explication)
11) I'm hardly going to respond to a poster that types such stupid shit. -- Same as #2
12) You have just typed the dumbest thing I have ever seen. -- Meh. Same as #6
13) That's the kind of post I'd expect from a poster that consistently posts stupid shit. -- Insult. Compounded by the same issues as #2

Live long and prosper.

[C K Dexter Haven]

I am not a GD moderator, nor do I pretend to be, nor do I want to be. Magellan01 pulled me in because he was voicing a complaint to the admins about tomndebb, who is a GD moderator. I knew that TubaDiva is gone this weekend, I wasn't sure of other Admin availability, so I thought I ought to respond quickly rather than let things fester.

I will call this thread to the attention of the GD moderators, who can comment on the rules of Great Debates as they enforce them. I made my call based on my understanding of the general rules for all forums: FAQ: Rules for Posting at the Straight Dope Message Boards, Post #10. Plus my experiences with formal debate rules, which are doubtless a trifle dated.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

I am not a GD moderator, nor do I pretend to be, nor do I want to be. Magellan01 pulled me in because he was voicing a complaint to the admins about tomndebb, who is a GD moderator. I knew that TubaDiva is gone this weekend, I wasn't sure of other Admin availability, so I thought I ought to respond quickly rather than let things fester.

I will call this thread to the attention of the GD moderators, who can comment on the rules of Great Debates as they enforce them. I made my call based on my understanding of the general rules for all forums: FAQ: Rules for Posting at the Straight Dope Message Boards, Post #10. Plus my experiences with formal debate rules, which are doubtless a trifle dated.

I didn't mean to drag you, specifically, into this. So I extend my apologies for putting you on the spot. I didn't know Mods were exclusive to the different fora. Based on your post in the thread that sparked this one, I think you can see how I assumed you could answer. But I guess it makes sense, as I am seeking an official ruling of sorts, to have someone more familiar with the specifics of GD answer. Thanks for providing the guidance you did. I'll look forward to an official explanation from TubeDiva or another appropriate administrator/mod in the next couple of days or so.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by MEBuckner

Moderator's Note: The BBQ Pit is the place for all "complaints and other discussion regarding administration of the SDMB" (which is what this thread clearly is).

I'd ask you to reconsider this. I do desire this to be a serious discussion, along the lines of what Sage Rat has offered. Keeping it here will decrease the likelihood that that will be the thrust of the thread. You can see that already. If you look at the OP you will see that this is NOT intended to be a rant, it is a serious question which I would like to debate: what does and does not constitute an insult in GD. I would appreciate it if you could move it back to GD. Thank you.

[kaylasdad99]

Rigidity and ossification are supposed to be qualities that improve the SDMB experience? Because that's where hard-and-fast policies such as you are insisting be implemented tend to lead.

In the absence of such policies, moderators have a responsibility and the authority to exercise judgement. That strikes me as a good thing. If the responsibility is shirked, and the authority abused, a member is free to have the matter looked into by the admins.

Rank-and-file members also bear some responsibility, to be respectful of the space, and of fellow members.

Really, it's not that difficult to intuit this knowledge about the board and its culture. GD just isn't the place to have the conversation about it.

[Waverly]

There are a lot of very stupid people saying very stupid things in GQ these days. Add to that a handful of poseurs and pretenders. I think we should lift the ‘no insults’ rule for a while and clean the fuckin’ place up.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by magellan01

Cite, please. Go into that thread and show me these horrid personal insults. And while you're at it, show me the warnings or admonishments I, no-doubetdly, received for such insults.

These are what I was referring to:

Originally Posted by magellan01

What the fuck is your problem? [...]Or pay a-fucking-tention. [...]Pay attention.

Originally Posted by magellan01

Look, genius, I was watching Matthews/Oberman last night, hardly your right wing spinmeisters.

I never said they were horrid. I said they were "personal attacks," you little sissy.

Originally Posted by magellan01

Either that, or I'll have to conclude you're simply lying. You'll forgive me that I'm not shocked.

Well, I wasn't lying. I conclude that you're a puss.

And you won't find any warnings or admonishments, because unlike you, I don't run to the moderators crying that my feelings are hurt. I take it up with the person directly. I've never once complained about another poster to a moderator; a whimpering little fuckwit like yourself wouldn't come close to making me end that trend.

[Sage Rat]

Originally Posted by Waverly

There are a lot of very stupid people saying very stupid things in GQ these days. Add to that a handful of poseurs and pretenders. I think we should lift the ‘no insults’ rule for a while and clean the fuckin’ place up.

That sounds like a pretty good road to getting the exact wrong result.... "Woohoo! GQ flamewars FTW!"

[MEBuckner]

Originally Posted by magellan01

So, are these all allowed in GD? Please be specific, because your explanation will doubt be used to artfully craft insults in the future. Perhaps even by a Moderator.

Ah, no thanks.

1) What you said is stupid.
2) Everything you have said is stupid.
3) Everything you say is stupid.
4) The stuff coming out of your mouth is completely asinine.
5) The stuff you say is completely asinine.
6) I am hardly going to report you for being an incompetent moderator who lies and distorts what has been said. I have better things to do.
7) I'm not going to report you for the lies, distortions and stupidity that you type. It would do no good.
8) I won't comment on the dumbfuck posts you continue to spawn.
9) Why do you keep spewing these lies and stupidity? Your posts in this thread imply a severe lack of education and gross stupidity.
10) That is the dumbest, most dishonest thing I have ever read on these boards.
11) I'm hardly going to respond to a poster that types such stupid shit.
12) You have just typed the dumbest thing I have ever seen.
13) That's the kind of post I'd expect from a poster that consistently posts stupid shit.

Frankly, I wouldn't be wildly happy with any of these in Great Debates. Any of them might result in at least a general admonition to please tone it down and debate the issues, not attack each other personally, etc. Most of them after number one could get you warned for a direct personal insult.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

These are what I was referring to:I never said they were horrid. I said they were "personal attacks," you little sissy.Well, I wasn't lying. I conclude that you're a puss.

You said "personal insults". Much of the other you cite is advice. Advice it would do you well to follow. Or not. The only personal insult from THAT thread was "genius". Now although it was delivered with sarcasm, the only way "genius" would be a "personal insult" would be if the person on the receiving end took great pride in being a complete fucking moron. In which case I might owe you an apology. (Even though it's only the one.) Be sure to let me know. Okay, moron?

And if you had heeded my sage advice and paid attention, you would have been able to see that I attempted to take it up with the person directly. He was ignoring the specific question, so I went to the Administrators. Kinda logical, actually. When you think another poster has flouted the rules you can usually count on a Mod to see it. But if a you think a Mod has flouted the rules and does not address it when you bring it up, going up the ladder is the logical thiing to do. Hope that helps, (genius or moron—you pick).

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by MEBuckner

Frankly, I wouldn't be wildly happy with any of these in Great Debates. Any of them might result in at least a general admonition to please tone it down and debate the issues, not attack each other personally, etc. Most of them after number one could get you warned for a direct personal insult.

That's pretty much what I thought. Thank you. Now to impose slightly further: the point of all this was this post:

Originally Posted by tomndebb

I am hardly going to warn you or threaten you with banning for being an incompetent debater who distorts what has been posted on a thread or throws odd red herrings into the discussion.

It seems to me that this is very much like many of the examples I provided, especially #s 6, 7, 9, and 11. So would you agree that it too d be (and is) in violation to the rules of GD? If you disagree, can you please be specific as to why not. Thank you.

[MEBuckner]

Originally Posted by magellan01

...can you please be specific....

Why, so you can "artfully craft insults" and see just how close you can skate to the line and still get away with it? See, despite your claims that this thread belongs in Great Debates and is intended to be a serious and sober discussion, you kind of poisoned the well from the get-go.

[Waverly]

Originally Posted by Sage Rat

That sounds like a pretty good road to getting the exact wrong result.... "Woohoo! GQ flamewars FTW!"

FTW? Fuck the What? That's fairly Zen. Or is that what happens after your eleventh tequila shot?

[C K Dexter Haven]

Originally Posted by magellan01

That's pretty much what I thought. Thank you. Now to impose slightly further: the point of all this was this post:

Originally Posted by tomndebb
"Iam hardly going to warn you or threaten you with banning for being an incompetent debater who distorts what has been posted on a thread or throws odd red herrings into the discussion."

It seems to me that this is very much like many of the examples I provided, especially #s 6, 7, 9, and 11. So would you agree that it too d be (and is) in violation to the rules of GD? If you disagree, can you please be specific as to why not. Thank you.

The difference is what came before. You expressed concern that you would be banned for disagreeing with a moderator, and tomndeb was saying that wouldn't happen -- wouldn't even happen if the situation was much worse, that is, if you'd been distorting or etc. Could tomndeb have worded it more politely? Sure. But he didn't, and his comment are still on the OK side of the line.

In short, context is important.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by magellan01

You said "personal insults".

Originally Posted by me

I can tell you what I think of your personal attacks in GD.

God damn, boy. You are fucking stupid.

[Fear Itself]

How about allusions to the sanity of a poster? Is it permissable to call someone crazy, suggest they start/stop taking medication or that they belong in a mental institution? I recall one thread that resulted in an email exchange with a moderator that concluded these were permissable.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

The difference is what came before. You expressed concern that you would be banned for disagreeing with a moderator, and tomndeb was saying that wouldn't happen -- wouldn't even happen if the situation was much worse, that is, if you'd been distorting or etc. Could tomndeb have worded it more politely? Sure. But he didn't, and his comment are still on the OK side of the line.

In short, context is important.

Huh? All of a sudden you feel qualified to answer? Not that I don't appreciate you taking the time to parse this, I do. But earlier you kind of bowed out saying that you felt you didn't have a good enough command of the GD rules and was going to wait for Tuba Diva. That said, I do not agree with your assessment. It was a personal insult. Period. Could he have worded it more politely? That depends on what he was trying to say. Given his command of the language I'm sure he could have crafted the insult to be more weasely, but he didn't. We have his words. They are an attack on the poster, not the post.

[Squink]

Originally Posted by magellan01

They are an attack on the poster, not the post.

Ohh Boo hoo for you!
I like it when moderators whack idiots up the side of the head. It makes the board more pleasant for the rest of us without over usage of the ban-stick.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by magellan01

They are an attack on the poster, not the post.

What is your fucking problem? Pay attention, genius.

Do you mean something like that? You said all that before tomndebb even entered the thread, IIRC. Now you are fucking whining because you believed someone attacked you and not your post? Pathetic. You are a sad little puss of a man.

[magellan01]

Hentor,

You niggling little niggler, you. Yes I made a mistake typing "insults" instead of "attacks". Guilty as charged. My apologies, as I did put the word in quotes. Now, if you think that changes the content of my post, whew! You're dumberer than I thought.

Advice: Pay attenion.
Strong advice: C'mon, pay fucking attention.
Strong advice with personal attack (that one you seem to so despise): C'mon, pay fucking attention, genius.

Choose one, two, or all three!

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by magellan01

Hentor,

You niggling little niggler, you. Yes I made a mistake typing "insults" instead of "attacks". Guilty as charged. My apologies, as I did put the word in quotes. Now, if you think that changes the content of my post, whew! You're dumberer than I thought.

Advice: Pay attenion.
Strong advice: C'mon, pay fucking attention.
Strong advice with personal attack (that one you seem to so despise): C'mon, pay fucking attention, genius.

Choose one, two, or all three!

Okay, here's my advice to you: Quit being a stupidass little sniveling puss. That's the only option I suggest to you.

[Iamonfire]

Why can't we all just get a bong?

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

What is your fucking problem? Pay attention, genius.

Do you mean something like that? You said all that before tomndebb even entered the thread, IIRC. Now you are fucking whining because you believed someone attacked you and not your post? Pathetic. You are a sad little puss of a man.

Wow. Evidently, this can't be said enough: Pay fucking attention. I called a Moderator on breaking the rules. He would not respond, therefore I sent it up the line. If he would have addressed it, we might not be here.

Now if you're reading this, just dart your eyes back up to the previous paragraph and read it again. Get it now?

On preview:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

Okay, here's my advice to you: Quit being a stupidass little sniveling puss. That's the only option I suggest to you.

What? That's it?!! You get all tough in the other thread and bandy about a threat of taking me to the pit ( ), then you come in here salivating, like youse gonna kicks yourself some butt, and this is what you bring? Well, good. (Yawn) The fewer letters I have to type for your consumption sans comprehension the better.

[E-Sabbath]

Originally Posted by magellan01

Hentor,

You niggling little niggler, you.

Oh, my god! Gladys, he called Hentor a niggler! I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you! I may faint.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by E-Sabbath

Oh, my god! Gladys, he called Hentor a niggler! I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you! I may faint.

Yeh, well, it takes one to know one.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by magellan01

I called a Moderator on breaking the rules. He would not respond, therefore I sent it up the line. If he would have addressed it, we might not be here.

See? This is why nobody likes you. You pick some tiny, insignificant little issue that has nothing to do with anything, and you throw a hissy fit over it. You're like a puppy chewing up shoes. No matter how many times somebody smacks you on the nose with a newspaper, you keep sneaking back to the shoe. I have no doubt you'll drone on in "poor little me" mode for 4 or 5 pages.

Let me break it down for ya:

tomndebb = good moderator, widely respected by many dopers.

magellan01 = whiny little fuckwit, generally laughed at by many dopers.

In other breaking news, the Sun is expected to rise in the east again tommorrow.

[Revenant Threshold]

I think magellan actually has something of a point on this (please hold off the tar and feathers).

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

The difference is what came before. You expressed concern that you would be banned for disagreeing with a moderator, and tomndeb was saying that wouldn't happen -- wouldn't even happen if the situation was much worse, that is, if you'd been distorting or etc. Could tomndeb have worded it more politely? Sure. But he didn't, and his comment are still on the OK side of the line.

In short, context is important.

I read what tomndebb was saying there quite differently. I don't believe he's saying "i'm not going to ban you, even if you did these things" - he's saying "i'm far from banning you, even though you are doing these things"; and among those things are insults ("incompetent debater" for one). I read it as a pretty clear insult of magellan.

[ambushed]

Originally Posted by Zoe

If your desire is to insult, why not just stick with the Pit? I can see your challenging someone in GD if what they have stated contradicts the truth, but that doesn't have to be done with invective.

I'm curious about the name-calling that you used to address Tom in GD. That seemed really beneath you. It made you seem malicious even though the names themselves were kind of silly.

You are better than this. (bolding ambushed)

Since when?? I don't think I've ever seen magellan01 do any better. To call him a fuckwit is an insult to fuckwits.

[C K Dexter Haven]

Originally Posted by magellan01

Huh? All of a sudden you feel qualified to answer?

No, I'm just explaining why *I* made the ruling that I did. Sorry if I was unclear.

_{Why do I keep looking at this thread? "Avoid the Pit," I say to myself, over and over.}

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Revenant Threshold

I think magellan actually has something of a point on this (please hold off the tar and feathers).

I read what tomndebb was saying there quite differently. I don't believe he's saying "i'm not going to ban you, even if you did these things" - he's saying "i'm far from banning you, even though you are doing these things"; and among those things are insults ("incompetent debater" for one). I read it as a pretty clear insult of magellan.

Correct, IMO.

And, as serious discussion of issues of this sort is not common in the Pit, it is unfortunate that the thread was moved here. magellan01 has a legitimate point. To move it to the Pit is merely to invite (tacitly, at least) diversion of the thread into a series of personal attacks against the OP. A way, IOW, of avoiding the question of tomndebb's behavior in GD, whether advertent or not.

Regards,
Shodan

[Revenant Threshold]

Crap, Shodan's agreeing with me. You do realise any credibility I once had is now shot, right?

Just as a general point, I don't think the board is best served by putting all critique of Mods or the board itself in the Pit. Certainly for the more insult-filled attacks on board speed, or if someone just wants to mock a Mod - but by making even those OPs which question a Mod's actions in a civil way be Pitted, it does invite general mocking and insulting from all concerned (and from those not). If threads such as these were allowed in ATMB then they'd be both shorter and probably end up with less ill-feeling on all sides, as well as stopping the random sniping that controversial posters recieve (even when it's deserved, it's pretty pointless).

[Cheesesteak]

Originally Posted by Revenant Threshold

I read it as a pretty clear insult of magellan.

As do I. However, I'm always hesitant in situations like this because I inevitably wind up "defending" some miserable malcontent, who's managed to stumble into a valid position.

I have a hard time understanding how the words "incompetant debater who distorts what has been posted" attacks magellan's arguments and not magellan himself.

[elucidator]

Bit of grey there. A disparaging remark centered on how one conducts a debate has some legitimacy. "That was an asshole thing to say" is phrased on the margins of acceptability, while "you are an asshole" is not. We have mods like we have traffic cops, we expect them to bust the utterly egregious, but not to convene a conclave of scholars to parse meaning. Kind of like we expect cops to bust someone slamming down the road at 110 mph but to shrug off 56 or 57 mph.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by ambushed

Since when?? I don't think I've ever seen magellan01 do any better. To call him a fuckwit is an insult to fuckwits.

This is rich. I seem to recall you atacking me in The Pit once before. That went well for you, didn't it? You migth want to review that sneaky, cowardly move of yours and remind yourself what it's like to be so wrong and get so bitch-slapped you run away for months.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

Let me break it down for ya:

tomndebb = good moderator, widely respected by many dopers.

magellan01 = whiny little fuckwit, generally laughed at by many dopers.

In other breaking news, the Sun is expected to rise in the east again tommorrow.

Well, not surprised to see you here. Life is nice and safe in a pile on. Enjoy. Now, while, based on exchanges with you in the past, I don't care a flea's ass what you think, this seems to be a good opportunity to help you with logic. Who knows, maybe it'll penetrate. Let's say Tom is a good mod—no, a GREAT mod—maybe even the best mod of all time, that doesn't make him right in this particular case, and me wrong. And that's kind of the point of this thread, which you decided not to address. Actually, I am of the opinion that tomndebb brings a great many positive things to these boards. He is articulate and has an impressive grasp of a broad swath of topics, particularly many aspects of history. I'm also of the opinion that he is not infallible, just like everyone else. The major fault I do find with Tom is that when he does err, he seems to be incapable of admitting his error and, God forbid, apologizing. Now I've long ago given up on the latter, but I will continue to hold him to the former, particularly when it involves me.

I hope that helps. Thanks for your valuable contribution. You may now go back to your nice simple world: "magellan01, baaad. tomndebb goooood."

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by magellan01

I don't care a flea's ass what you think

They're so cute when they say this...