First off, I read through Giraffe’s latest example of a pit thread by VCO3, and although he never returned, never once was he called upon to. There was only one question and it was rhetorical .
This warning of Giraffe’s leaves several questions for me.
Is it proper form to make at least one more post in any thread you start when no one prompts you to re-engage? Quite often all you need to do is get the story off your chest.
Can a moderator properly judge whether VCO3 should repost or not given Giraffe’s latest example.
Isn’t anyone else uncomfortable with a rule that applies to only one person?
If I had a child who habitually shit on the carpet, I’m not sure my “solution” would involve requiring him to return periodically and play with it. Admittedly, I am no expert in child-rearing. (It’s just something I dabble in occasionally.)
Why does anyone have to return to a thread? I don’t like new rules being made especially for just one person. It’s a bad precedent. It makes me nervous as an unliked member of this board. It’s for the better when VCO3 doesnt return. He’s reading from afar with a smug grin as everyone falls all over themselves proving him right.
Who decides what proper form is? Proper form at my grandmothers house is two forks, a knife, and two spoons arranged in a cult like fashion at dinner. The rule emposed on VCO3 would be like a mod stating that this is the only way to eat dinner, it’s not cool.
Then again, you post unpopular opinions. You don’t post in an intentionally incendiary fashion, and you tend to reason out your posts. I think VCO3’s restrictions make sense, particularly after he’d been warned many times, suspended, and then allowed to return under what should be a watchful mod eye.
It’s in the middle for me; I think the only-for-him WARNING should apply, but should have been directed at VCO3 over private messenger, vs. in the public forum.
Bad form.
Still, I’m not comfortable with the one person rule thing. When one applies to me, CL/SDMB/whoever, no longer gets my money.
The warning isn’t just to him but to anyone contemplating emulating him. And if secret actions and warnings started happening, the mods would be criticized for that, too.
Why shouldn’t someone return to their thread? Do you typically start a conversation and then walk away while the other person is talking? This is a message board. We are having conversations. Type written and time delayed, yes - but still a conversation. If you just want an answer to a question without having an exchange, use Google. If you want to rant and walk away, get a blog.
Besides, this isn’t really a new thing around here. It has always been considered bad form to start a thread and never return, no matter what the forum. You’re right in that it was never a “rule” before just something no one really appreciates.
Cite? I’ve seen a couple of threads where you’ve claimed this. What is it based on? I’ve been Pitted 3 times, and attacked in other threads, and I don’t feel there is some large-scale built up dam of resentment against me. I’ve had people attack my post in one thread, and and the same people support me in another. Even VC03, I don’t think, is “disliked” by the board. Opinion seems divided between disgust and amusement. Or some dislike the behavior – making outrageous claims, and then whining about how hurtful the responses are.
If I came in to tell a long and glorious story of how I stubbed my big toe after tripping over the fucking dog, stepping on the stupid cat, knocking over the ugly lamp while I was holding my mothers favorite crystal ball then perhaps no. I don’t think a return to the thread is required other than to say thanks for the Bravos.
There is no reason to return to defend my big toe but perhaps to explain the crystal ball.
But…
If I rant about about some shitty service I got at Walmart and I make statements how I called the sales girl a cunt, then I think you might have to return and explain yourself.
IMO if he wanted to call VC3O out he should have removed his mod hat and done so as a poster.
“Is this another rant were you never return to explain yourself further?”
I am uncomfortable with it and just because it has happened in the past does not make it right. A lot of things have happened in the past does that mean they should be repeated?