I’ve raised new points in the sense that I gave honest explanations for my actions that were at variance with your interpretation of them. Since they don’t seem to matter I would agree there isn’t much point in further discussion.
That’s not correct.
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
You’re going to be known as Paper Towel Tube Man. I believe you said you didn’t care if your rep was ruined around here, so why are you complaining about it?
[/QUOTE]
“You” in that quote does not refer to Lute Skywatcher. It addresses Starving Artist.
Regards,
Shodan
He was obviously referring to this post - http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15628852&postcount=92
The one you quoted is an explanation of why the phrase has become a meme, and why SA has no rational basis to report every post on the board that mentions it.
Sincerely,
Crazyhorse
Correct.
We’re allowed to use hate speech, but we can’t poke fun at SA using the meme? Huh?
I, personally, have no objection to mention of the paper towel tube thing. To the mods’ credit, they seem to have decided to clamp down on it because of it’s strong hijack potential.
However, given the bizarre nature of the rulings in this case I’m not sure if I can mention now just what it is that I do object to.
Still, I’ve mentioned it elsewhere in this thread and elsewhere on the board, and it doesn’t seem to have sunk in any more than mentioning it again now would. So perhaps not mentioning it again is just as well.
Hijack potential? Are you kidding me? Almost every thread gets hijacked in one way or another.
Yes, the strong potential that you will hijack the thread and restate all your arguments from the Sandusky thread when the post simply references a humorous board meme that does not in itself criticize you or the theory.
- The reference to paper towel tubes is not insulting to anyone.
- You yourself have stated that you support all the arguments that initially led to the meme.
- Hi Opal!
- Despite this you complain about it whenever it happens, and/or hijack that thread to re-argue the Sandusky case.
- A board meme usually begins with some situation that at least one poster was involved in during at least one thread that is no longer directly relevant to the meme.
Regards,
Crazyhorse
Hijack potential means being potentially (about as potential as hurricane Sandy at this point) of you hijacking the thread. You should just put a link to the Pit thread in your sig so you don’t feel the need to rehash the same “argument” over and over. Or maybe they can just make it a sticky.
By you. Every time it’s mentioned you rush in and bring all of your arguments from the Sandusky thread and it does highjack the thread.
Taking the quarry meme as an alternate example, Bo defended it mightily in the appropriate thread. To his credit he doesn’t rush into every thread into which it’s mentioned and re-try case for using it.
The problem isn’t the meme - it’s you.
Sorry, but that simply isn’t true. The reason why has been posted several times in these ATMB threads. I suggest you look it up.
It kind of is. By treating the “paper towel tube test” in an undignified manner, such as joking about using it in situations where it would clearly be silly, you strongly imply that you hold the test in low regard. Even if that is not your intention, that is a natural interpretation. SA will then want to try to convince people to hold it in high regard.
This differs from, say, sheep references, because there is no ongoing argument about sheep.
If a thread was specifically about board memes, then I would think the reference would be on topic. But to use it as a joke, with a clear implication of silliness, in an unrelated thread, is, I believe, what is being frowned upon.
This was your 5,000th post here. Just sayin’.
Your priorities seem to be placing your desire to address these issues above your desire to not get Mod Warnings.
Good luck with that.
It has been established in many cases that just because one or more posters are annoyed by something that one or more other posters do, that doesn’t make it a rules violation for other posters to do it, even knowing this.
If someone mentions paper towel tubes with no direct insult or even mention of SA, it might annoy SA (although it remains a mystery why since he is proud of the stance he took that led to the meme) but it isn’t a direct insult. It isn’t necessarily a statement of disapproval of the theory, and it in no way attempts to rehash the argument about Sandusky where it originated.
It is a hijack but only to the extent that any other one-liner, meme, or tangential topic is a hijack, and they are all very common in GQ threads.
So, sure, people may do it despite knowing it could annoy SA but that isn’t a technical rules violation. In other cases such situations have been permitted by TPTB. It would be SA’s own decision to hijack a thread and rehash the Sandusky case. Enforcing a rule in a special case to prevent one poster from being tempted to continue breaking the rules seems ridiculous.
The more time that goes by, the Sandusky thread will (hopefully) be buried in the sands of time, but people will still think its funny to say “paper towel tubes” in many different contexts forever. While SA may be annoyed by it, it’s not a direct attack and doesn’t seem to break any rule (other than a potential hijack if it is really at an inappropriate time)
Starving Artist, Shodan’s advice in his first post in this thread seems pretty sound.
I haven’t read all of the threads referred to in this one, but as long as I’ve known you, you’ve seemed to me to be a reasonable person when others aren’t taunting you. And I say that even though we tend to disagree on issues.
I’ve seen you angry and frustrated from time to time. But I’ve never seen you “troll” as you were accused of doing. You believe so passionately in having the truth of your posts not mischaracterized. I like that about you. I’m sorry that others so often misread you.
When seeing Zoe’s name appear in this thread, knew there would be a common sense post to read.
Sticky… like the proverbial paper towel tube!
Thanks, Zoe. Long time, no see. It’s good to hear from you again. 
Geezus.
Starving Artist, you need to grow a pair and let it drop. Like others have said, you created that meme all on your own with some crazy stuff in the Sandusky thread(s). And I say that as somebody that probably agrees with or at least thinks Starving Artist has a point when 99 percent of the rest of the folks think he’s off his rocker.
Hal Briston has the sheep thing to suck up. Marley has the universal banning. Snowboard bo has the rock quarry thing (though personally I think he likes it). Opal has “Hi Opal” AND the buckeyes thing. Various other folks here have their own meme crosses to bare.
Get over it. Unless someone explicity brings up your paper towel tube theory to discredit your theory on why Sandusky is innocent…just…let…it…fracking…go. If its a bad joke or a bad joke you think is actually totally inappropriate the discussion at hand report it to the mods and move on.
There was another long term poster here. Who always had to get the last and most words in because his arguement/integrety/something would be called into question supposedly if he did not. Now, technically, he (Dio), got banned for other reasons, but IMO the real reason he did was because he caused countless thread trainwrecks defending his positions and finally after enough complaints TPTB let him hang himself (kinda like Al Capone going down for tax evasion I suppose).
Don’t be that guy. Or if you do, just do it fast so we can all get on with life.
I’m kinda waiting for the fourth version of this thread, “warning about a complaint”.