Oops, that was a reply to Contrapuntal’s post, not Happy’s.
Well another worm can is opened. Isn’t the Pit where questions about moderation belong? Exactly what the fuck is the point if such questions are to be unanswered because…because why? * Doesn’t want* to participate in her own pitting? What, is it bad form? Fish in a barrel? Promotes unsightly cold sores?
‘I won’t answer questions in the forum where they are supposed to be asked because that’s the Pit, you see, and such things simply aren’t done.’
That’s some Catch, that 22.
I wasn’t giving a direct quote, and I won’t quote directly from personal correspondence without the other party’s permission. Suffice it to say that she provided reasons for not wanting to participate, and while I don’t agree with them, I don’t think they were necessarily unreasonable either. Anything else is neither here nor there.
I’ll have to take your word for it. If the Pit is the proper forum to question administrative decisions, I cannot imagine a reasonable excuse for citing the Pit as the reason for not replying.
I can almost guarantee that you would have got bitchslapped if you had of opened this thread in ATMB.
But no answer in the pit due to it being a pitting of her :dubious:
Did anybody really think that there wouldn’t be a pit thread about this after the silliness in the ATMB?
Damn! Now where in the fuck did THAT come from? Apologies for the complete strangeness of that…
Of course I read the thread. And only the dimmest, most unaware, most totally clueless board member conceivable would have wondered why that poster was banned. Which means that the OP is
a. Either the dimmest, most unaware, most totally clueless board member conceivable who’s too lazy or stupid to run a search on the last few posts by the poster in question.
or
b. A total dick who likes yanking the board administration’s chain out of some perceived slight, exaggerated sense of entitlement, or because it’s some fucking game with them.
In either case, if I were an moderator, I would not have been so tolerant or so measured in my response.
Nobody was asking why he was banned, dumbass. They were asking if the policy to announce board bannings/suspensions had changed. Fuck are you that dim?
Made perfect sense to me. I thought you were trying to make the point that bibliophage would never get pissy with members for no apparent reason the way Lynn and TubaDiva did.
And all this time I thought you were a reasonably intelligent guy. Thank you for disabusing me of that notion. :smack:
You read the thread? You read the OP titled Are bannings no longer announced??
You read the first post that said
You read the OP’s 2nd post that said
You read the fucking thread and you still think the OP was asking why the poster got banned. I think I’ve found the most totally clueless board member conceivable and it’s not Contrapuntal
Moderator? Why aim so low. With your level of cluelessness an Admin position seems more suitable.
I hate defending her, but I don’t want to be the source of baseless accusations, either. What I said was not a direct quote. She did not say that she did was not participating because it was in the pit. She refused to participate and gave her reasons. My term for what she was refusing to participate in (a thread I started that happened to be in the pit and was directed at criticism of her) is “pitting”. She did not use that word and said nothing about the BBQ Pit.
I’m sorry I was unclear.
Whether you were unclear or not, the situation is the same. The person mentioned was seemingly VERY bitchy (with no good reason, IMHO) and sees no reason to justify herself or apologise.
While I respect the unpaid, and demanding, job that the mods do, the admin (mentioned in this thread) of this board is a paid employee of the SDMB and/or The Chicago Reader and should at least pretend to be a professional.
At my job, it wasn’t my job to interact with customers. If I found myself in that situation, however, I would have been fired or suspended if I treated them the way we (the members) were treated in that thread.
An honest question was asked. Dex answered it, quite professionally (IMHO.) Then his de facto bosses on the board show up and give the genuinely curious and casual readers of the thread the literary equivalent of a middle finger.
As long as their psychic abilities are working to determine the motives behind the questions, what are the chances of them tossing me next weeks winning lotto numbers?
- DESK
I think you’re assuming that mods or admins have an obligation to answer our questions about their actions or defend themselves in a pitting of their actions, Desk. I’m not sure that’s the case. They do usually answer questions, but is it something they are required to do? If Lynn and Tuba don’t want to come here and discuss this and they are not obligated to, it’s their call. They won’t be the first posters who don’t show up at their own Pit party.
Yeah, that was kind of what I meant but it sure came out weird didn’t it? I can’t even blame it on beer either dammit…
:mad:
They don’t have to, but it stirs up the very unrest that they were complaining about.
Actually, featherlou, I know that the admins, in the past, have made it quite clear that they feel that they have no obligation to the members and/or guests of the board. I do think the mature, professional thing to do would be to come here to apologise and/or explain why they went off in a thread that certainly didn’t call for it. Had it been closed after Dex’s answer, I’d have no problem. But Lynn and Tuba came in and vastly over-reacted in a manner that would have been cause for a mod warning had one of us regular posters done it.
Peace - DESK
You could confirm that I am by Googling my real name.
All right, let’s pretend that Contrapuntal’s OP was as innocent and lamb-like as he claims. Then why the overreaction to what was no more than a somewhat exasperated post? He was not gravely insulted in the post. No foul words were used. The post said:
a. We haven’t gotten around to it yet.
b. The mods are getting tired of being questioned every time a decision is made, even when the reasons for those decisions are glaringly obvious.
So if Contrapuntal was just curious, the courteous reaction would be, “Oh, OK.” and “Sorry I caught you on a bad day.” NOT, I see that the mods are getting tired of being questioned, so lets start up a PIT thread and see how irritated we can really make them.
When someone starts making a mountain out of a molehill, I question their intent. Especially when they unnecessarily created the molehill in the beginning.
It still appears you haven’t actually read through the two threads in question. Contrapuntal, the OP in the original thread, was entirely polite about the question and attempted to keep the thread on track until TubaDiva and Lynn’s off-topic comments, whereupon he requested it be closed. This thread was opened by Alan Smithee, who didn’t even post in the original thread until after TubaDiva and Lynn’s comments. There wasn’t even a molehill there until those comments.
If you are going to comment about the situation, I think you should at least read the threads and get straight the sequence of events.
Swell. I’ll get right on that.
It’s not so much what was said, it was how it was said. The OP was a simple question: Has the policy about announcing bannings been changed? The question was then aswered politely and succinctly by Dex. There was no need for Tuba’s and Lynn’s subsequent pissy replies.
If Contrapuntal had been the one who actually started this Pit thread, you’d have a very valid point. But since it was Alan Smithee who started it, you just look even more foolish.
Tell us again how you read the threads in question?