I’d like some clarification about what, exactly, is a personal insult. Saying someone is “henpecking” someone is a personal insult, but this:
"Why the heck did you review a cookbook when you hadn’t bothered to cook even one recipe? Why were you wasting time on such a fruitless exercise when you should have been preparing flavorless Anglo-Saxon gruel for your sick hubby?
Mexican ingredients are hardly exotic here in Texas, of course. And they are pretty common in Chicago. Is your little town so isolated that no Mexicans live there–or were you just unwilling to venture out of your little suburban enclave?
Couldn’t you have picked a cookbook more to your liking? "
is okay? I’m confused. “Henpecking” is by the very definition of the word a criticism of someone’s actions, which would seem to fall under the “criticize the post, not the poster” rule. “Unwilling to venture out of your little suburban enclave” is a criticism of someone’s attitude and motivations, which sounds far more like a personal insult to me.
So why did one pass unmentioned and the other get a warning? Don’t tell me a mod didn’t see that post–it was quoted in a post of mine that drew my only warning in 8 years, so I know it was seen. What gives?
No, I don’t think it would. This isn’t gospel or anything. I’m not junior modding. I’m just saying that, to my mind, the two are very different.
A post is an entity. It is a piece of writing in a space on a website. There are no actions. Only words. A criticism of a person’s actions is not a criticism of the piece of space where his words are printed. It is POSTS that we can criticize. Words on a page. Not people — and by extension, their actions.
Now, this all applies only outside the Pit. Inside the Pit, it’s a different story. You can criticize a person’s hairdo. Or a person’s political views. Or a person’s actions. If I’m wrong, I’ll be corrected shortly.
ETA: And it applies only to members criticizing members, and not, for example, members critizing President Obama (if only there were something to criticize.)
I honestly have no idea what that even means, as a response to:
Why must you say anything at all about Carol? This thread isn’t about Carol; it is about a rules question.
Everyone here does what? And what does “playing Not ME.” mean?
It is such a non sequitur, in my view, that I don’t even know what questions to ask you about it. Would you mind connecting the two posts for me, yours and mine? In my old age, I don’t do as well with connecting dots as I once did.
With great respect, I’d like to take this opportunity once again to stress the importance of an easily recognizable and uniform method of dilineating your mod writings from your member writings. Sometimes it’s clear, but sometimes it isn’t. Dex has obviously been posting in his admin role in this thread (as only mods and admins may announce things like that they’re going to start handing out warnings.)
But some of his stuff could be just member stuff mixed in. I don’t know. You might know. It could be that you and Dex have been friends for years, and you can read him like a book. But we don’t all share that kind of relation with many, if any, mods and/or admins. So we really can’t tell when it’s “as a member, I think this thread is getting a little heated,” or it’s “as a mod, I think this thread is getting a little heated.” (A member opinion versus a moderatorial comment.)
Surely, y’all could put together something. It’s not much more of an effort than Bush’s color-coded warning levels. Just establish a standard, and use it. If it’s [mod hat on], then fine. But make ALL mods and admins use [mod hat on] everywhere and all the time. And make them take it off when they’re done posting in that capacity.
You don’t have to listen to and weigh 20 different and conflicting suggestions from us. Just come up with something and implement it. It’s only fair, if you ask us not to criticize your mod rulings, that you very unambiguously identify them.
(The above is requestful in nature, and is not in any way intended as a criticism of mod/admin actions.)
I’ve been visiting this place less and less because it’s simply too complicated to understand the rules. You guys know that you have most of us by the short-hairs, because we have friendships here, that are vulnerable to being severed by being banned from this board. This has led to obvious abuse and manipulation by the moderators here. I mean it, in the most constructive way; please get some clarity and consistency in how this place is run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TubaDiva View Post
Big T, you should be more civil about this. Shouting is not useful and is abusive. This is not the Pit. I’m not shouting at you and I’m not being rude, you too should likewise be courteous.
Then, From C K Dexter Haven
Now, GODDAM IT PAY ATTENTION!
This is ATMB.
I understand that this quote is from the "Can moderator ignore the Rules violations? Well, they certainly have ignored the decorum!
With apologies, I have been convinced by the other mods that this is not a good idea, and I agree. I have amended my comments above in Post #74. You may pit me as poster, but comments about moderators go in ATMB. I made that original offer in a spirit of experimentation, but I now rescind it. For one thing, it would mean extra work for Pit mods, who would have to tell me which mod actions were subject of pit threads and who posted to them, so I could ignore their posts on the same actions in ATMB (those who would eat their cake and yet have it.) Anyhow, experiment over. Sorry.
I would be happy to have additional suggestions about what to do to attract attention, when prior mod comments are seemingly being ignored by the very people they were directed at. I agree it was a violation of decorum, I certainly would not do it often, but nothing else seems to get attention. Frankly, even that didn’t seem to get attention (a good lesson for me).
Finally, “you are annoying” is different from “what you said is annoying.” Replace “annoying” with “henpecking,” “nagging,” “stupid,” etc. It’s a criticism directed at the poster, not at the post. And I certainly agree that the line is sometimes a fine one, and often depends on context. When the context is “let’s all jump on a poster” in ATMB, after the mod has said cool it, then the line wears thin indeed.
There is an easily recognizable and (pretty much) uniform method. It’s content. If I am posting about board rules, violations, tone of a discussion, behavior of a member, etc. then it’s posting as a moderator. If I am posting a comment about enjoying a TV show, about some political situation, about someone’s kitty-cat who died, etc. then I’m a poster.
I agree that there are a few situations that might be unclear, in which case most of us say something like “Mod hat on” or whatever. The number of unclear situations, however, seems few and far between.
Addendum: OK, I can see that the last sentence there, “The number of unclear situations, however, seems few and far between” could be viewed as me posting as a poster. The context, however, makes it clear that I am posting as a moderator. Pretty much any posts in ATMB from any mod are in the role of moderator, unless they say different explicitly.
“Henpecking” is a transitive verb, and by definition (and by the usage above) describes a poster’s actions, not the poster herself (or himself).
But that’s neither here nor there. What’s more important is that you’re setting the bar for what is considered an “insult” absurdly low, such that any any mildly negative word directed at the poster is now an insult. “You’re not funny?” Insult. “You rub me the wrong way?” Insult. “You’re misguided?” Insult. To be an insult, a remark has to be actually insulting, not just negative.
But don’t members post also about such things? I know I’ve seen it aplenty. In Cafe Society, someone might remark in the middle of an American Idol thread that people are getting pretty nasty, and that they’re no longer enjoying the thread. Or in Great Debates, someone might begin their post with something like, “Can we get back on track now to the original OP?”. Or in ATMB, a poster might alert an admin that he misunderstood the OP — which is about the nature of the discussion.
And so, it seems like you’re saying that mods may post as members so long as they do not discuss a subset of the things that members ordinarily discuss.
And again (seeing Dex’s response as well […sigh…]) I realize the futility of this simple request — a standardized procedure among the mods and admins. But it’s just so silly that y’all will do almost anything to avoid it. It’s like the guy who does his lawn trimming with scissors because he can’t be bothered with pulling the cord on his weed eater.
It doesn’t make any difference whether a verb is transitive. We are allowed to attack a post. Only a post. And nothing but a post. Just the words — not the person, either directly (“You’re a slut”) or indirectly (“Your actions are slutty”).
I am asking this (of the mods) with the utmost sincerity.
What is an appropriate way to disagree with/disapprove of a post outside of the Pit? “Your actions are slutty” would clearly be inappropriate. But can you say something like “I think this post is unfair and stems from your history of disliking so-and-so”?
We’re still feeling our way through this issue, I think. You’re allowed to ask why a particular post was not considered to be against the rules, for example, even though that suggests you don’t approve of the post. That’s part of what this forum is for, and also allows for commenting on the questions people ask, why they might be asking a question, and that kind of thing.
But I think we’re all agree that ATMB is not intended to be The Pit, Jr. You can’t insult people or call them trolls here any more than you can in any other non-Pit forum.
Is this true? If so, how come there hasn’t been a post from an admin/mod? I thought warnings were always given in public so posters could learn from each others ‘mistakes.’
Right. It’s my understanding that you can’t just couch it in layers of conditionals, for example. So, “If I were to comment on you personally, which I am not, I would call you a slut.” is equally a no-no.
It really is hard to understand why people at this level of intelligence can’t see the difference between a post and a poster. One of those can be as vigorously attacked as you wish; the other is off-limits outside the Pit. What’s so friggin’ hard about it?
Yeah, me too, but my warning for the post right after Cat Whisperer’s hasn’t been announced either. My firmly held belief that TPTB are making it up as they go along has not been shaken a whit.
[/joke]