It’s a very bad idea. If “Non-Pit Rules Apply”, just move the thread out of the Pit.
Or create some kind of super-Pit where no rules apply at all, so grown-ups can be grown-up. I’ll moderate it myself - I never get offended.
No, it’s really not a side issue, The intemporate response was the direct result of a seemingly capricious mod action.
The mods have yet to either acknowledge their (Lynn’s) culpability in the response she got, or demonstrate her innocence by explaining the underlying rule she was enforcing.
That’s what pisses people off, and why there are so many haters. There are plenty of mod haters, but you need to understand that the mod haters are created by the mod actions. I wasn’t a hater until I wound up on the wrong end of one of these capricious, punitive rule enforcements that only applied to me and only that once.
If misleading thread titles are just fine – which they clearly are by years of precedent – then Lynn deserved the response she got because she was absolutely in the wrong to throw around her authority the way she did. That’s the core issue; not some stupid rules lawyering “it’s the pit but not the pit start another thread to say the exact same thing or it’s a suspension for you, buster!” clusterfuck of a solution.
Ed hasn’t said that financial motivations are not a major consideration in this “Pit cleanup”, just that there wasn’t a brainstorming meeting at which the decision was made, and that no one “directed” him to take action (I had not suggested that he was told to do this).
Another analogy: this mini-foofle reminds me of the case of a high school newspaper whose stories rankled the administration, and as a result the principal or other administrator decided to take over the reins as editor (“not to stifle dissent but to assure professionalism”).
:dubious:
I don’t think this is going to go well at all. I Like the pit just as it is thank you.
If you really have a problem, why not lock the thread in “time-out” for 12 hrs or so. by that time it will have probably fallen to the bottom of the page and cooler heads prevailed. If if starts back up as hot as ever, then close the damn thing and be done with it. I don’t like the idea that I have to walk on eggshells in the Pit now, I have a hard enough time keeping track of the rules in the other fora.
Ask someone who was banned due to a trainwreck or unwarranted pile on.
True enough.
Yes, that pretty accurately describes the feeling I’m getting, too.
ETA: It’s not a good feeling.
It would help if we Dopers didn’t have trouble with guidelines, or try to get TPTB to specify what “don’t be a jerk” means.
Please, let’s keep it civil.
I want to be clear about this: The SDMB is a free message board and you are our guest here. We’ve established what we think are commonsense rules and we expect people to abide by them. The rules are enforced by volunteer staff. The staff confers frequently by e-mail about board issues and we strive to be as fair as we can. Inevitably, however, there is going to be some variation in how stringently the rules are enforced. If you think you have been singled out for unfair treatment please e-mail me the details and I’ll look into it. However, and this is the essential point, the fact that you disagree with a mod action does not entitle you to respond abusively. To repeat: If you wish to take issue with a mod’s admonition in a thread, you may do so, but failing to comply or posting an insulting or abusive response risks disciplinary action, ranging from warning to outright banning. This is one of our cardinal rules. If you can’t live with it, the SDMB is not the place for you.
Let me state it more plainly: Financial considerations played no role in any of this.
Has it escaped everyone’s notice that this is the Chicago Reader we’re talking about? Chicago, Illinois?. And I’d just like to point out that the Obama camp has not denied any involvement.
Just sayin’, is all.
Goddamn Blagojevich. Frickin looney tune opened his mouth and now we can’t get away with jack.
:eek: Are we allowed to swear like that under NPR?
I’m really confused. You quoted a post that seemed pretty civil to me. It had a few swear words, so I was going to ask if being civil meant no swear words. But then you proceeded to swear. So what does keeping it civil mean?
I’m entirely unclear about what’s acceptable and what’s unacceptable here. Perhaps some examples would help. Or maybe hypotheticals or something.
You guys, come on. Let’s not get paranoid. Fella looked like he was working up a big head of steam, just trying to head things off. As for swearing, “frickin” and “jack” are euphemisms on a par with “gol-derned,” and “goddamn” might have gotten you three Hail Marys if you confessed it to the priest back in 1958. Anyway, I’m calling it a night, so everybody be nice.
Since we are allowed to cuss in all other forums (as this is an Adult MB), I’m guessing that generic cussing in a NPRA thread is okay. Words are just words – it’s all about how they’re put together in a sentence to convey a meaning.
Christ, people, if fewer of you would stop going out of your way to be a pain in a moderators ass, the rest of us wouldn’t have to slog through this thread trying to seperate the wheat from the chaff.
I think Ed is post-padding in this thread.
I used a smiley 'cause I was trying to be silly, silly.
I just started to read this thread, but Miller’s idea here seems to be a much better one.
No, seriously, not you.
I quoted your post because the naughty word thing seems to be an issue here lately. I got the smiley, assumed we’re on the same side, used your post, and then realized it’s the Dope, where someone (not YOU, anyother reader) could take offense and go apeshit, so I added the ETA.
Hugs to Emilyforce, everyone else can bugger off.
Dude, when are you gonna learn how things work around here? They have no time for intelligent, courteous questions. Say something stupid, obnoxious, and/or easily dismissable and you’ll get an answer.