I can’t really respond to this in THIS particular part of the dope, but suffice it to say, you’ll see how things really are here soon enough.
I was a big defender of the mods when I first got here, too I am not so much a defender after seeing how things are done.
Despite our battles, Sleeps doesn’t need to get the last word because she usually cuts right to the heart of the bullshit and doesn’t need to belabor anything.
Yes, it’s childish. What it is not is threatening. Moreover, Marley did not merely suspend her, he threatened to ban her if she ‘did this again.’ (no explanation of what ‘this’ is). So now not only has Sleeps been suspended based on a bad interpretation of a rather flip comment which didn’t even warrant the ‘RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!’ response it got, she can also be banned by the same lax standard of interpretation of intent. Nor is this the first time Marley has done so (interpret intent). In fact he has quite the history of it. I don’t expect you to be aware of it and having been on the end of the ‘n00b’ stick myself, I don’t denigrate you for it, but there are things of which you are not aware that nonetheless play into the decision.
Who gets to determine this?
they do
…and that’s what’s fucked up.
The Stonecutters.
She doesn’t need to get the last word? She cuts right to the heart of the bullshit? And yet there she is, telling a moderator that he/she is harassing poor little her by doing exactly what he/she is supposed to be doing; moderating. That’s her cutting through the bullshit alright. That’s her not having to get the last word.
Please.
This is incorrect, at least on this message board. Let me copy and paste what appears at the top of every page,
Very explicit.
Edit: Now that I notice there is more than one page in this thread, I see Contrapuntal has already made this point. :smack:
I look at it this way: they’ve worked hard to take care of this board, which means getting rid of spammers, reading many threads, responding to PMs, reading reports of dubious posts, having to decide on each of those dubious posts, etc. etc. and in all those decisions I disagree with a small fraction of them. Maybe in your case you disagree with the vast majority of what they do, I don’t know. But when I look at the big picture, the amount of times where I personally disagree with them is minuscule.
I’m surprised this is even a question. But then, I’ve always been of the opinion that it’s better to be nice to people than to criticize people, and you should spend a bigger majority of your time complimenting people (where appropriate) than pointing out their flaws. Additionally, I have found that when you approach people that way, they are more inclined to listen to you if perchance you do feel obligated to point out their flaws.
If you are asking my opinion, I would say this: if you think the board is full of suckitude, then find another place you like better. If you think the board has good stuff, then concentrate on the good stuff you like here, and ignore the bad stuff.
But see, I think that the suspension is defensible.
Yes.
See previous disclaimers. I guess for some, the interpretation of her considering continued PMs to be harassment ranges from her threatening to power-stalk him in real life, to possibly starting an ATMB thread about it. For me, the interpretation of her considering continued PMs to be harassment is she will consider continued PMs to be harassment.
And as some completely unsolicited advice, try to ignore crazyburrito.
Obviously I disagree.
I interpret it as a cheap ploy to cow someone into backing down, precisely as it’s used in real life.
Lol, I’ll keep that in mind. 
Screenshots of most of the exchange are here. If there are more, I’m sure a request to Sleeps would turn them up as well.
As to the “but the other modes agreed so it’s all hunky dory” argument I have the following to say, “If fifty million men say a foolish thing, it is yet a foolish thing.” (Anatole France)
And if I had this much chickenshit in my garden my tomatoes would be ten feet tall and probably walking around like fucking Triffids after this thread got done landing on it.
I can fully relate to Marley’s reaction – some posters just rub you the wrong way, so when they get mouthy it can be pretty irritating. But I think modding with your emotions is a mistake: even if you find a letter of the law argument to justify it, it looks bad.
Bad analogy time: cop gives someone a speeding ticket. Person is angry and requests cop’s badge number so he can file a complaint. Cop technically has the power to say “you know, you were weaving a bit back there before I pulled you over”, throw the guy in cuffs, and drag him downtown for a blood alcohol test. But he comes off looking a lot worse than if he just politely hands the person the ticket and ignores the bluster.
When you’re on the powerful end of a power imbalance, it’s short-sighted to use that power to “win” dumb little tiffs like this one.
Again; it’s not a threat. ‘Threatening to make an accusation of harassment’ being the reason for her suspension here. That’s the entire reason for this thread; attempting to cut through the bullshit of the accusation that Sleeps made a threat. She didn’t. No such threat exists; Marley inferred intent (again, as I pointed out in the post above, not the first time). So while I understand your position, I disagree with your understanding of the motivation for the punishment.
And I agree to an extent. I try to start most people out on the respect scale at mid point. Where they go from there (up or down) depends on them. People who value honesty over ‘being nice’ are more likely to go up the scale than the reverse. I have no problem with being nice, so long as it doesn’t interfere with being honest. I have issues with going along to get along. Additionally, I think it’s important that management not turn into an echo chamber and when something looks wrong, it should be pointed out. Sorry about the rambly; hope that makes something close to sense.
Yes, I get that. Were he to say ‘she was a jerk in a PM by being snarky and obnoxious’ I might even agree. But he accused her of doing something she did not do. That’s the part that I have the problem with. She did not threaten him. At no point in those two sentences did she utter ‘if you do X, I will do X in return.’ All she said was she would construe further PM’s as harassment. That isn’t a threat. At worst, it’s a snarky dismissal. That takes us back to the honesty/respect thing.
Just as a quick response to this, I wasn’t saying that because Marley had support of the mods that everything was OK. I was saying that it was foolish to lynch Marley given that he/she was, in effect, acting on the will of the staff.
It wasn’t that sort of reaction, though. Marley went to the other mods. It would be like the cop calling it in, “hey, this person is giving me trouble” and being told “alright, bring him in then.”
“Yeah? What’s she doing?”
“You know… just bein’ a scumbag!”
“Well, haul her ass in then!”
“10-4!”
The way you hate on me makes it seem like I actually did something to harm you in some way. For fuck’s sake, direct that hate at someone who actually deserves it.
Fucking Emperor Palpatine Old Lady.
Oh and now playing the part of the former mod defender, Tacoloco, we have AClockworkMelon. Someone who has just shown up and wants people to think they have actual perspective into what happens here and how the board works.
I don’t give a shit how many goats you’ve fucked AClockworkMelon, you still don’t know what you’re talking about.
Lol!
My analogy wasn’t perfect, of course. Marley didn’t haul her in.
Imagine that same officer who pulled over a speeder. He has the power to let the speeder go with a warning, though of course it is within his power to give the speeder a ticket. The speeder starts yelling and shouting at him. The cop, without even necessarily be required to call it in, does so anyway, only to be told to give the speeder a ticket.
Then all the speeder’s friends protest.
So, what would have happened, exactly? Maybe she would have put you on ignore. Maybe she would have (gasp!) started an ATMB thread. If the first post was “Marley is harassing me!” the second would have been, “Oh, really, how?” With the reply, “He replied to my question.” Then maybe you could issue a warning about making baseless accusations against a mod (or just roll your eyes and move on). But suspending someone just because they, at worst, threw a little hissy fit, when you could have just… you know… not sent another PM? Honeyplease.
One of the two of us has been a moderator at an active community with over 500k registered users. Hint: It’s not you.
I like Option 3: Focus on the good stuff while also attempting to improve the bad stuff. Why do you think it has to be “love it or leave it”?