The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > About This Message Board

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 08-02-2012, 10:18 AM
Drunky Smurf Drunky Smurf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Smurf Village.
Posts: 4,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chefguy View Post
Tell it, sister. These are stupid rules, created because somebody was in a major pout. The problem now is that to retract them would be to admit that the response was childish. So the mods generally (and properly) tend to go easy on people who occasionally slip up. That said, the idea of shutting things down over this is unthinkable, so most of us just grit our teeth and acquiesce.
I personally have never seen a mod give out a warning for the language rules.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #202  
Old 08-02-2012, 10:28 AM
Irishman Irishman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
I think it entirely possible that

1) Snowboarder Bo wants to know why the mods didn't enforce this rule, and
2) Snowboarder Bo is simultaneously upset that he got insulted and the mods didn't do anything about it.

From my perspective, I don't really care that the only reason Snowboarder Bo is concerned about the question is because it affected him. I don't see how that changes the fact that he asked a fair question. That the rules are bullshit and the mods are tapdancing around to enforce them as lightly as possible is a reasonable response to the general question.

The specific incidents were answered.

Regarding the requests for clarification, as I see it, there are the rules the way Ed would like them, and there are the rules the way they are written. Because Ed doesn't actually read or post here, the mods have leeway to moderate within the way the rules are written, and truncate any ambiguity to their own preference. Ergo, the mods elect to go as tightly on "variants" as they can.

Now, if somebody wants to go whine to Ed and bring this moderation interpretation to Ed's attention and get him poking his nose in here again, they certainly could. But why would you want to? The record suggests that will not end favorably for anyone here. It's not likely to get Ed to rescind those rules. It might get the mods handslapped for not moderating the spirit, but I think they are pretty well covered by the letter of the rules, and if Ed comes down too hard on them, well, they are volunteers. The most likely outcome would be Ed revamping the rules in some way to make them more stringent, or spell out more specifics, or give instructions to the mods on how to moderate the ambiguity. Leading to more bullshit rules that most of this board think we shouldn't have in the first place.

I personally think the questions have been asked and answered, and what's left is a fight over Snowboarder Bo's motivations. That shouldn't be in ATMB.
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 08-02-2012, 10:33 AM
Lord Ashtar Lord Ashtar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Yes, I agree that twice in one thread is amazing.
I can go back to the other threads on this topic and quote a few more if you like. My point is just that if you feel that multiple people are continuously misunderstanding you, you need to be more clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Let me ask you, Lord Ashtar: why do you think that people like Knorf and Banquet Bear are telling other posters that I have a valid question?
It was a valid question, and has since been answered. Don't think you're going to change the mods' minds on this, you've been here long enough to know that's futile.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 08-02-2012, 11:44 AM
Chefguy Chefguy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 24,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drunky Smurf View Post
I personally have never seen a mod give out a warning for the language rules.
They only seem to issue cautionary advisories without actual warnings. Few posters push the issue unless they're trolls.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 08-02-2012, 02:13 PM
Drunky Smurf Drunky Smurf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Smurf Village.
Posts: 4,411
Yeah, I've lots of mod notes but no actual warnings.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 08-02-2012, 03:43 PM
Cheshire Human Cheshire Human is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
... Bo used that catch phrase for nearly a year before anyone ever really noticed....
That it takes nearly a year for people to get pissed off enough at an annoying behavior to start complaining about it is not at all the same as taking nearly a year to notice it. Point FAIL.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 08-02-2012, 04:06 PM
mhendo mhendo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 20,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Bo used that catch phrase for nearly a year before anyone ever really noticed.
This is flat out untrue. It's not even close to accurate. You are so far from being right here that i can only conclude that you never even bothered to check the claim that you are making.

A search of Snowboarder Bo's post for the word "quarry" shows that he used his little catchphrase for the first time on December 16, 2011.

On January 4, 2012, Frank started a Pit thread in which he provided 20 examples of Bo using the phrase over the previous few weeks. By my calculation, that's a period of 19 days between Bo's first use of the phrase and the first person telling him to knock it off.

Just over a week later, on January 13, Absolute started an ATMB thread asking the Mods to tell Bo to knock it off.

So, if 19 days and 28 days qualify as "nearly a year," then i guess you're right. Otherwise, you're completely wrong.

Last edited by mhendo; 08-02-2012 at 04:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 08-02-2012, 04:43 PM
Chimera Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 12,136
Well sweet jesus, mhendo!

He first posted it in 2011 and it wasn't until all the way in 2012 that he got pitted for it. That's a whole year right there, isn't it?

Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 08-02-2012, 08:17 PM
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ashtar View Post
I can go back to the other threads on this topic and quote a few more if you like. My point is just that if you feel that multiple people are continuously misunderstanding you, you need to be more clear.
I don't feel that way. Thanks for the advice tho; I'm sure it will be invaluable in the future.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 08-02-2012, 08:47 PM
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,681
Ed childish? Examine the mote in your own eye.

Not to open a can of worms, but I didn't have a problem with the old pit rules, nor do I have a problem with the new pit rules.* In fact, I wouldn't have a problem with far more restrictive pit rules. I can adapt. The insistence that one needs to use 24 caliber cuss words or the claim that the principle of restricting one's usage of such words harshes one's vibe strikes me as childish. Ed's efforts, OTOH, seem to me to be entirely defensible though they admittedly didn't work out particularly well -- or so it seems.


* Nor do I have a problem with the current interpretation of the pit rules. Nor would I have a problem with another interpretation of the pit rules, if the current mods deem it fit.

Last edited by Measure for Measure; 08-02-2012 at 08:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 08-03-2012, 12:35 AM
Gfactor Gfactor is offline
of the Gladiators
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 9,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
Regarding the requests for clarification, as I see it, there are the rules the way Ed would like them, and there are the rules the way they are written. Because Ed doesn't actually read or post here, the mods have leeway to moderate within the way the rules are written, and truncate any ambiguity to their own preference. Ergo, the mods elect to go as tightly on "variants" as they can.
Irishman, I don't intend to single you out here in any way. I hope it doesn't come off as if I am.

Actually Ed approved this approach almost exactly three years ago: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=525879

See specifically: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...2&postcount=32

I've said the same thing in many other threads, and Ed has also approved this approach elsewhere, both on the board and off.

So once again:

1. This approach is anything but new.
2. It's the approach that I told everybody I would apply when I became a Pit Moderator.
3. Ed knows.
4. Pay attention
5. Thanks all

Gfaptor

Admode

Last edited by Gfactor; 08-03-2012 at 12:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 08-03-2012, 01:40 AM
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Gfactor, thanks for the info. I can't say that it exactly clarifies the rules themselves, but it does show that the interpretation of the rules does have some standard and also has explicit approval from Ed. Had I been aware of that thread, there would have been no need for this one (obviously). Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 08-03-2012, 03:06 PM
Irishman Irishman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Thank you for the clarification, Gfactor.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 08-03-2012, 07:26 PM
Gfactor Gfactor is offline
of the Gladiators
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 9,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Gfactor, thanks for the info. I can't say that it exactly clarifies the rules themselves, but it does show that the interpretation of the rules does have some standard and also has explicit approval from Ed. Had I been aware of that thread, there would have been no need for this one (obviously). Thanks again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
Thank you for the clarification, Gfactor.
You're both welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 08-03-2012, 08:16 PM
Chimera Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 12,136
I for one demand less clarification. I demand total confusion, misdirection and wild speculation!
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 08-03-2012, 08:32 PM
samclem samclem is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 20,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I for one demand less clarification. I demand total confusion, misdirection and wild speculation!
Hang in, there. There's always next week.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.