:rolleyes:
The mere fact that you’re protesting the actions of a moderator who’s been on this board for years shows that that means nothing.
I want to know who AClockworkMelon really is with this all in defense of Marley and the mods.
You sound way to familiar with board politics to be someone who’s really “just” showed up here.
Hahaha. xD
What have I said that indicates I’m familiar with the politics of this board? I don’t know if the mods can run my IP and compare it to the IPs of other users like mods on some other boards can, but if they can, go ahead and run it. I find it hilarious that you’re so quick to jump this type of argument.
That’s what I was trying to say but I didn’t phrase my options very well. If you think there is NOTHING good about the board, then leave it. If you think there is some good and some bad, then sure, point out the bad stuff - but you should also take the same amount of trouble to point out the good stuff.
I don’t understand something. You can get a don’t be a jerk warning for something you say in a PM? Maybe I misread something. But, it appears as if Sleeps got a second warning for saying something to Marley in a PM at 11:36. Well before the threat.
That must have been pretty heinous.
Ah. Who cares. I expected “her” to be banned ages ago for being an obvious sock.
Well, in any case, your defense of the mods is laughable.
I WAS you at one point which is why I can see how ridiculous it is for you, an alleged newcomer to be this vociferous in your defense of people you allegedly have no experience dealing with.
You have no idea how wrong you are, just like I had no idea how wrong I was, despite people telling me otherwise.
But yeah, man, keep on keeping on. You’ll either a) see the light b) or become a mod-loving syncophant.
What can I say? I root for the underdog.
The reason I’m this vociferous in my defense of people I (of course, allegedly) have no experience dealing with on a board I am (of course, allegedly) new to, is because there isn’t anyone else that I can see coming to Marley’s defense. It’s like I’ve moved to a new town, seen some things happen to fellow townfolk that bother me and when I try to speak up one of the elders puts a hand on my chest to hold me back, “you just don’t know how we do things here, son.”
Maybe I’m being naive, but until I “see the light” I can’t really do other than what I’m doing, can I? I mean, I suppose I could just shut up and not get involved, but that seems to run counter to the entire point of a message board.
I am rather surprised how quickly people on this board tend to jump to personal attacks and hyperbole, but I can take it.
Just interpreted your name- are you the infamous CrazyBurrito I was warned about earlier or is he your cousin?
Posters can’t put moderators on ignore.
This is quickly going down one of those rabbit holes where people try to extricate every ounce of meaning out of two sentences, and I find those discussions to be unbearably tedious. I’ll just say that “if you communicate with me any more, I will consider this harassment” is close enough to “if you do X, I will do X in return” that I wouldn’t split hairs about it.
Thank you, you put that more eloquently than I could have. >.<
I’ll somewhat agree with this. The response to Sleeps with Butterflies could have gone either way. If someone had said “How could Marley23 let Sleeps with Butterflies get away with that comment when Poster X back in 2002 got warned for saying something similar” I would be OK with defending the moderator decision to let the “harassment” comment pass. But if my friend gets stopped for speeding, starts mouthing off to the cop, and then the cop says “by the way, I’m going to ticket you for not wearing your seat belt too”, then I’ll tell my friend “if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”
nevermind
No, not really. What does the Giraffe board have to do with anything? :dubious:
Sleeps may be blunt, but I don’t see her as a troublemaker. If anyone should have gotten a suspension for that thread, it would be Cisco. Marley was just all butthurt over someone not kissing his ass.
The ambiguity is over what “consider it harassment” means. Does that mean “If you continue to PM me I will be annoyed” or does it mean “If you continue to PM me I will file a complaint”? I do not think it is a stretch to interpret it as the second. Especially since Marley has already been accused of inappropriate PMing (also meritless).
Anyway, how big a threat is “filing a complaint”?
I guess the situational ambiguity is trying to consider the merits of allowing a poster to drop threats of complaints against a Mod for doing the Mod’s job.
Cisco got warnings in the thread, and while he questioned the merits, he did so appropriately in ATMB. He did not start a PM pissing fight with a mod.
Sleeps didn’t get suspended for her actions in that thread, she got suspended for her reactions to the modding.
Different circumstances, different results.
Sure, it could certainly boil down to a semantic argument, and I dislike those as well (so much so that I cease participating in GD threads the second they start forming). I suppose our criteria for ‘threat’ differs. If I were to tell you ‘stop replying to my posts or I’ll consider you a poopy head!’ how ‘real’ is that threat? And what could possibly come of it? I could Pit you, I suppose. ‘Arnold Winkleried is a POOP! He keeps responding to my posts!’ What would that accomplish aside from generating a great deal of amusement on behalf of the SDMB posting public? Likewise, what did Sleeps’ PM accomplish to make it a ‘threat’? ‘If you keep PMing me I’ll think you’re harassing me.’ How is that a threat? No, really. How is telling a moderator you’ll think bad things at them a threat so dire it’s deserving of the threat of banning? And yes…Marley did threaten Sleeps with banning.
I think the post that this is meant to serve as a response to is adequately responded to by the post you quoted in the first place.
If that were the case, it would have answered the question. It doesn’t. The ‘threat’ is at best nebulous. Certainly not deserving of a suspension and definitely not deserving of the real threat of being banned.
Someone posted something earlier which I found particularly appropriate. A board which prides itself on encouraging open communication on any subject cannot then turn around and then discourage criticism of its staff. If you’re going to flip out so badly that you suspend someone for talking back to moderators, then just come out and say that your decisions are final and discussion isn’t going to go anywhere. Stop pretending that the 3% (if it’s that high) of reversed decisions is in any way indicative of willingness on the staff’s part to listen to reasonable disagreement.
It wasn’t a criticism of a moderator that got Sleeps into trouble.