And the “junior mod” accusations are totally unfounded, of course, so an apology or at least retraction is due there. Excalibre was in no way implying, and I’m sure he does not believe, that there is or should be a rule about not using anime smilies in every single post. He was saying ‘Hey, in case you haven’t noticed, you’re the only person in this entire place who does that; if you have noticed, maybe you should consider why that might be’, in essence. You might think it’s out of line for him to comment on that, but he definitely wasn’t “junior modding”.
Maybe you don’t realize you’re being snotty. I already quoted you, but let’s go again.
Ah, poor you. Snot.
Am I the only one who sees you acting innocent here while throwing daggers? Seems like a bit of a martyr complex. “I don’t blame you for the way you act.” Please. Of course you blame people for how they act. Get off your cross.
Not snotty?
No, no, levdrakon dear. I’m extremely snotty! The question is what evidence you have to support your claim that Jesus was not.
I have it on good authority that the real reason Judas betrayed him was because of the way Jesus and Peter made fun of the sandals he wore to the Last Supper.
Well you’ve got me there. I have no cite proving that Jesus was not not a snot. Heck, he probably was, considering how many people he pissed off.
Negative feedback on the anime smileys could count as castigation, if one is willing to stretch the meaning of the word far enough. I would hope that as someone who is willing to assign terms such as “insulting”, and “liar” to what I see as message board banter, you wouldn’t protest such stretching too vigorously. So there’s a possible interpretation. Don’t ask me to defend that interpretation with my body, though. The fact that it was unsolicited negative feedback in a post that had doodly-squat to do with the discussion in the thread, and that it was coming from a CHARTER MEMBER to a guest, coupled with the offense that Clockwork took, might lead an outside observer to see “Junior-modding-program-related-materials,” to coin a phrase. Again, merely a possible interpretaton. You’ll have to learn from Baker whether it played any part in her choices.
I am so glad you make it easy on me by asking only for “possible” interpretations. If you were playng hardball, you’d be asking for “reasonable” ones. 
Point of nitpick. Baker is a woman.
I already granted you her misdirection. However, your inference of her statement as meaning she was denying that the dig was directed at your behavior is your responsibility. If she wishes to claim that she was implying that you jumping on it without seeing your name mentioned suggests that you are thin-skinned and quick to pounce on a perceived slight, I wouldn’t like to be the prosecutor responsible for convicting her of lying about that.
Bottom line, for me: we’re all Dopers here. I’ve never thought either one of you is eligible to be called a total dipstick. As far as I’m concerned, both of you are entitled to my respect, not merely as Dopers, but in the top 25% (forgive me for not subdividing more finely).
Ensign Edison, I don’t think of you as a troll, it’s just that I personally found your phraseology somewhat vile. Upon reflection, however, I estimated that someone who can handle Fred Phelps getting up in her face and calling her a whore, could handle someone on a message board calling her a “contemptible wad of fuckless banality”.
Personally, I hope you do keep the phrase in your arsenal*, although I believe there are other posters who deserve it more than Baker does.
*I invite you to click on my profile, and note what I refer to as Interests.
Forgive me. Ensign Edison, I lost focus for a moment. Just in case you thought I was speaking metaphorically about Phelps, I wasn’t. Baker really and truly does have face-to-face, in-the-trenches experience with the fucker.
Could it? Webster’s says that “castigate” means “to punish or rebuke severely, esp. by harsh public criticism”. Can you really claim that I was “harsh” or “severe”? Or that I in any way attempted to “punish” or “rebuke”? I’m sorry, but that stretch is simply too far.
But there simply wasn’t junior modding. Mods enforce rules; I don’t see how you can possibly imply that I was telling Clockwork that it was against the rules, and I don’t know any interpretation of “junior modding” that doesn’t involve telling someone else they’re breaking a rule.
The point is that it was an exaggeration so great that anyone who read it would assume that I had said something that I didn’t. Unless Baker is simply so deluded as to think that I actually “castigated” or “junior modded”, then we can only believe that her intent was to deceive. Clearly, in fact, from the reaction of Clockwork, we can see that he didn’t believe me to be acting in any official capacity; he basically told me to fuck off - which is a perfectly reasonable response to someone else sharing an unsolicited opinion, and not one that implies in any way that he took my recommendation as any sort of command.
I said “disingenuous” for that one, not “liar”. She was referring to me, which makes it irrelevant whether she used my name or not - why she would expect me to ignore her undeserved snark (since you challenge the idea that suggesting I’m a wannabe “arbiter of taste” who is to be “ignored” is an insult) because my name wasn’t there? If she meant to reassure Clockwork (something I’m not convinced of) then she certainly could have chosen less combative language to do it. It’s far closer to the truth to suggest that Baker was castigating me than vice versa.
Well, I can only judge people by what I see. I don’t know anything about Baker. The name sort of rings a bell, but there’s a lot of people around here, and I don’t know who all of them are. My only experience is that she decided to “castigate” me (certainly she will agree that my use of the term is far more apropos than hers) for suggesting that another user not use so many smileys. Her response was far out of line with what I said. Some people will no doubt tell me that my opinion is not special - but I’m under no delusion that it is; I shared my own opinion, in a reasonably gentle way, regarding something that might potentially affect how a new user - one who is clearly articulate and intelligent - is perceived. There was simply not a drop of malice in what I wrote, nor was there any coursing through my veins.
Baker’s response, on the other hand, was pretty clearly more poison pen than I deserved. The only evidence I have before me is that Baker is a rude bitch to people who share opinions. Maybe that’s not always true - quite obviously I wouldn’t like to be judged by my worst moments around here. But it sure was true this time, and she didn’t improve any when she decided to come here and “vent” about it.
Well, I’m flummoxed! After several days’ cooling off period, plus some very welcome good news lately, I find I’ve lost most of my passion for this particular fight. I’m wrestling with the feeling that I should be a good boy and come up with detailed and persuasive posts for both ETF (whom I’m glad to see treating me as a friend again) and Excalibre, who took the time to come up with a detailed and persuasive post of his own. So instead, let me just make the following statements and then I’ll be content to let things ride in whatever way they may transpire in the future:
I would respectfully disagree with you, ETF, regarding Shodan. (Big surprise, huh? 
) I think of him as an extremely intelligent person (and btw, the only direct interaction that has taken place between Shodan and me is the very brief one that took place in this thread, plus one other in which he offered his condolences in regard to my uncle who had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s), whose beliefs and positions are well thought out, and who is very comfortable in his own skin. I think that the brevity to most of his posts is due primarily to two things: one, he - like me - recognizes the futility of trying to argue this or that political or societal issue around here, given that there is no absolute right or wrong that can be proven with regard to just about any of these issues, as they too subjective in nature to be settled definitively through either debate or evidence; and two, he does not suffer fools gladly either, and IMO certain of his posts are intended to expose or spotlight remarks or people that he feels are foolish. However, he gets his points across succinctly and without viciousness, which I think separates his way of dealing with what he views as foolishness from that of Excalibre.
Having said that, I thank you for taking the time to write your tactful and helpful post to me. It’s obvious that you took pains to be tactful and to phrase the things you said in such a way as to make them the most palatable to me, and I appreciate that very much.
And Excalibre, I would only say that if your last post to me was typical of your overall posting style, there would be no problem at all between the two of us. In that post, you made clear what you’ve disliked about my behavior toward you during the time we’ve been going at each other; you explained much better than ever before what you were getting at when you said you felt I was incapable of formulating an argument (please refer to my remarks above regarding Shodan for the answer); and you made your dislike of me, and the reasons for it, quite clear. And yet, that post raised in me not one iota of anger or resentment because it was straightforward, calm, factual, and reasonably expressed. It also contained a fair bit of what I found to be a rather charming humility, which I think suits you well.
I, too, do not remember the source of the enmity between us, but knowing the way you’ve struck me during most of our history, I don’t doubt at all your perception of the way I’ve treated you. Frankly, I’ve behaved that way toward you because I’ve long perceived you as being a cruel and viscious person who was snotty and insulting to most…and downright cruel to those you thought you could hurt most easily and most deeply. The brightpenny thread would be an excellent example of what I’m talking about, though there have been other instances IMO that were just as bad if not worse. I have long viewed you as a bully - and a particulary harmful one at that, given your way with the language and your apparent eagerness to inflict harm on the very posters who in my view were least equipped to be able to handle it.
I hate bullies! I mean, I really, really, really hate bullies! And regardless of what originally transpired between the two of us, the real reason I’ve gone after you in the way I have is because of the way I’ve seen you treat other people.
You have many gifts, Excalibre, and truly you could be one of the most respected and influential posters on this board if it weren’t for the cruel and viscious streak that seems to be so thoroughly ingrained in your personality. But I have hope because I looked up your profile and found that even though I’d had you pegged as being in your mid-to-late thirties you are apparently only in your early twenties – and the kind of cruel making-sport-of-those-weaker-than-you type of behavior I’ve seen you exhibit is more typical of someone who is still in their youth. This immaturity is further illustrated by the nature of your IM address and the gleefulness you exhibit in the nasty attitude and behavior that you are known for here and (ahem) elsewhere. But such behavior accomplishes nothing, unless your ambition is to be a real life version of Beavis or Butthead. You would be much better served, IMO, to abandon the cruelty, visciousness and vitriol that you so frequently display, and to make the posting style you exhibited in your last post to me the style that typifies your personna on this board.
As you know, my enmity toward you is strong and runs deep, but in some ways I have as much regard for you as I do for anyone on this board. It’s a real shame to me that you let your genuine intelligence, education, ability, and willingness to do good be so severly undermined by these more juvenile aspects of your personality. You say you are a not-so-nice person. Why is that? And, if you recognize it as a negative, why do you not take steps to permanently change it?
You have been very open and frank about your dislike of the way I’ve treated you, and yet my behavior toward you is nothing compared to the way you’ve treated many others around here. Given that, how do you suppose they feel? Truly, you accomplish nothing that is positive by being mean to people. Yes, I know this is the pit and all, but it’s one thing to go toe-to-toe with someone who’s genuinely asking for it by calling you names and insulting you, and it’s another entirely to drag some poor soul in here for a verbal savaging once they’ve exposed a weakness in some other thread or forum, or to viciously insult and demean someone way out of proportion to anything they’ve said to you.
I truly hope that you will decide to take the high road and change your posting style to the much better one that you’ve already shown resides within you. If you do, I think you’ll find that you are one of the most respected contributors around here, not only by me but by most everyone else as well; and if you don’t…well, I’m afraid we’re just gonna keep on bangin’ heads.
Regards,
SA
We’re not still arguing about me, are we? I’ll admit, I’ve kind of lost track of this thread when I was no longer the center of attention, but it struck me that I should at least set the record straight wrt my involvement. So, here it is (however posthumous to significance):
DrDeth: Very kind of you and I appreciate the kudos. I hate to respond by disagreeing with you, but I think that dnooman whooshed me good and truly. I take your point, however, that claiming a whoosh to cover up being wrong/making a joke that doesn’t work is at least obnoxious, if not trolling. I do not believe that is what he did, however. I was unaware of the legendary Omorosa’s claim that the “pot/kettle” thing was racist (which is COMPLETELY stupid, and she deserves to be mercilessly skewered for it), so it slipped right by me.
At any rate, while I appreciate your support in this thread (and am quite flattered by it), I have to agree with dnooman on this one. It’s not personal bias, I’ve never met either of you. I just think his “WHOOSH” claim was legitimate.
And dnooman: No apology necessary for the “dumbass” remark. Once I twigged to the fact that I’d been whooshed, I FELT like a dumbass. It was my turn that day.
I would buy you BOTH a beer, quite frankly. It’s all good on my end. Just wanted to clear that up, in case it needed it.
As for the rest of the thread…it ain’t about me, so I ain’t interested.
oh my Heavens, a thread in which I agree with *both * **Excalibre ** and **Starving ** Artist! Who’da thunk it?
Yes, Excalibre, you’re snotty as hell. Do you practice? For once in his entire posting life (that I’ve encountered him, granted it’s usually in political type threads :p), **Starving Artist ** hit the nail on the head. You’re a wonderfully bright, gifted, knowedgeable bully. Again, I ask you, can’t you tone it down a little? It’s a nasty thing to be, and while it may bring enormous gratification to you (which would be sad, but I guess some people are like that), it hurts your ability to make your points, and it makes the entire SDMB less than what it could be. Good Lord, I’ve never been the target of your bile (that I can remember), but sometimes when I read your response to something, this generally bright and confident fifty year old shrivels into a little kid who feels as if the only thing she could say would be on the order of “Yeah, well you’re another!” if she had the nerve to say anything at all.
I must say, my inner armchair psychologist is having a field day with this thread.
For someone who is so unrepentantly vicious, cruel, and gleefully spiteful, it’s odd to see such a thin skin. For someone who enjoys claiming that others must be responsible for the interpretations he makes of their posts, it’s interesting that he seems to enjoy passing responsibility for his own posts off to anybody who responds. If he presents himself as an arbiter of good taste, and someone disagrees that he is, in fact, as superior as he thinks he is, why, it’s an insult! (Let’s not even get into the use of the obviously hateful and scandalously mean rolleyes smiley. Superior Individuals will not have their August Opinions disagreed with in such a manner.) It’s just odd to see someone who will mock a user who is obviously unstable and considers message board banter to be “gang rape”, not just in a Pit thread, which is rather standard, but also go after her in personal email, trying to make her as miserable as possible… and yet, can’t even handle having someone fail to recognize their Obvious Superiority in matters of subjective aesthetics. These are not the actions of a well adjusted and happy person.
I get two mental pictures: one of a Dandy, half his bodyweight in lace, who walks into a room and declares “You are wrong, uncouth, and foolish.” and when someone responds “Aww, you’re not the Judge of Proper Form” the Dandy whips out a (well cried upon) handkerchief, sobs a bit, and declares that his sacred honor has been insulted, and it’ll be pistols at dawn. And how dare that peasant insult him so by not accepting the lecture with proper humility and reverence.
Either that, or someone fwapping madly to the reactions their posts earn. “Yeaaah, I’m mean. Yeah, say it again. Yes, yes, I enjoy hurting people. Oh goddd, say how condescending and supior I sound, say it, say it! Say my name, oh god, call me cruel! Yes, yes yeeeeeeees!”
Ahem, I’ll leave you with those mental images.
My god, does anyone *really * care about “CHARTER MEMBER”? I mean, more than a couple bucks worth of cachet?
And, if you dudes are going to argue about whoevers conduct in whatever thread, please link to the damn posts or thread (with post # provided then) so we can tell the players without a scorecard? I’m confused about these far too fucking subtle allegations. I am guessing somebody has a problem with someone over something they said somewhere? 
I mean, I went back to where **Excalibre ** gave **bup ** a hard time about HP, and I could see bup’s point, sure. So, what’s this new point?
Note to Excalibre- I know that we have disagreed at times- and thus you were wrong - but I can’t think of any real problems I have with your general postings. You are opinionated - so am I- but at least intelligent.
Dijon Warlock- you’re welcome, and no worries dude, I just over-react to “WHOOSH!” :smack:
From the Lassie’s Penis thread: The pertinent Posts from what I can determine.
The offending post by Baker that Excalibre took insult from.
It looks to me like Excalibre overreacted, but that is just my opinion.
Jim
Eh, not so much. I don’t like those stupid non-approved smileys either, since oftimes I am not really sure what the fuck they are trying to indicate, and *at best * they are cutesy.
And, I think Baker overreacted and *then * so did Excalibre. My god, talk about a tempest in a teapot. :rolleyes:
But the person who REALLY overreacted is anyone who could possibly remember this exchange long enough to mention it again over in a different forum, which means that - hey kaylasdad99- get a fucking life, dude. Buy one on eBay if you have to.
Holy mother of God, can I hear an amen? Fin’s got his own images, but I’ve got one of my own: chimpanzees fighting to the death over a grain of rice.
Daniel
This is rich, coming from the fellow who, within the past week, tweaked Oakminster for “hiding behind a dictionary.”
As to the rest, let’s see how elastic the circumastnces can be demonstrated to be. For the purposes of this message board, I hope you will agree that your criticism was public. As to “harsh,” that strikes me as being an “eye of the beholder”-type adjective. If Clockwork wants to take it as harsh, that’s his decision to make.
That seems to establish the minimums for your definition.
I’m not implying it, and I don’t feel any need to defend anyone else’s selection of the term, beyond providing a possible interpretation, as I did last night (you really should have insisted on reasonable, you know).
Okay, fair point. I see now that, in your view, Baker’s “lie” was when she said you were a “castigating” “junior mod.” You say “lies”, I say “overstatements”. Reasonable people can differ on occasion, I hear. I think this os one of those occasions.
Dude, “undeserved snark”? On the SDMB? Just the fact that you can, without irony, place those words together, tends to validate any charges of thin-skinned-ness, quickness to take offense, and overall drama queeniness that anyone cares to throw your way.
I don’t challenge your characterization of it as an insult because your name wasn’t there. I challenge it because it’s just so mild. Get back to us when she tells you you’re a “contemptible wad of fuckless banality.”
Perhaps she could have. I didn’t see it as particularly combative (that is to say, I think she could have been seriously more combative, had she so desired). I did see it as trying to give a gracious reassurance to a guest. Your mileage obviously varies.
Oh, you poor dear. How did you bear it? I certainly hope you reported her ass.
Once again, perhaps. But at least it was in the same conversation as what you said.
As I didn’t see the exchange until I learned about it here, I won’t speculate as to whether I would have thought it was rude upon my first viewing. Clockwork’s response suggests that he thought it was, as does Baker’s.
There you go again with that “deserved” crap. Please build a bridge and get over yourself.
Or maybe she has a notion that if something is chafing at you, the thing to do is to complain about it in the Pit. Periodically, someone will even oben an omnibus Pit thread for stuff that doesn’t merit its own thread.
From your mouth to God’s ear, brother!
It strikes me that once you have decided that you’re going to take offense, it tends to cause you to “see” deliberate offensiveness to judge by. I saw Baker being more gracious to the guest than I saw you being. And her coming here to “vent” about it, I thank her for, as it resulted in my feeling confident enough to make an observation or two (sorry FinnAgain, your backstory struck me as too dauntingly convoluted to invest the time in).
Anyway, as fun as this has been, I feel that I’ve already spent about as much effort on it as I am prepared to. I’ll leave you with this:
A charitable reading of Baker’s post to Clockwork could be, “Don’t take Excalibre’s post too seriously. It really doesn’t mean anything in the grand scheme of things.” I will explicitly give you the same counsel. Don’t take Baker’s post too seriously. It really doesn’t mean anything in the grand scheme of things.
kaylasdad, you seem really, really invested in this for no reason that’s obvious to me. It’s not a big deal. I had my say in the original thread. I wouldn’t have mentioned the matter again except for Baker’s coming in here and bringing it up. And as far as I can tell, we both had our say in this thread. Since then, I’ve only been replying to you, since you seem to have lots and lots to say about the subject. I’m afraid I’m beginning to agree with DrDeth’s recommendation that you get a life.
What can I say? It’s a slow day on the phones.
For what it’s worth, as I stated above, I hadn’t even read the Lassie thread until I saw Baker’s reference to it. I had seen the thread title, and, being intrigued by it, had placed it on my to-do list, though. I suppose I should have linked to it, though. My apologies.
Ok, that I can understand, I’ve had slow days too. On somedays, you know- it just doesn’t seem worth it to chew through the straps of my restraints.
Part of the reason he might have overreacted to the anime smilies is that there was a banned serial returner (possibly before your time? I don’t remember the original username myself) who used them and it was the “tell” for his posts. He could have been looking out for Clock’s benefit so that people didn’t think he was that returned poster.