Did someone call for an administrator?
G. Nome, manhattan was perfectly correct in asking you to explain yourself, which you have not done. I am telling you now that manhattan owes you no apology, and that you need to explain yourself to my satisfaction NOW. And I will determine whether or not I’m satisfied with the explanation. Otherwise, you will be taking a short leave of absence from the board to think things over.
Lynn
Administrator
For the Straight Dope
[sub]Hmm, this should be interesting…[/sub]
G. Nome’s infamous quote (again):
I interpret this line as, “If you have too much promiscuous sex, you’ll contract AIDS,” a sentiment that is neither anti-gay nor particularly provocative (in fact, I think I’ve seen this message on billboards). I assumed that the interpretive leap one must make to attempt to understand this sentence was an illustration of G. Nome’s contention that the bread-in-jar phrase is ambiguous. And now the administrator comes down on G. Nome like white on rice, so to speak. WTF? Go after Manhattan for making wrongful accusations of gay-bashing. Should a boardmember be threatened with banishment because of a moderator’s offensive left-field interpretation of a vague comment? Prove to me that “bread in your jar” means “anal sex” and that AIDS (and anal sex) is exclusive to gays and you’ll have made your case, but otherwise there’s no controversy, only administrative muscle-flexing.
[sup]Hmm, yes it is interesting…[/sup]
RailroadShorty et al defending G. Nome here, I’m afraid y’all just don’t get it.
manhattan’s quote (again)
So…he asked her to explain. He said he wanted to give her a chance to explain. Manny is smart, and knows that G. Nome does not always make her point clear. What an abuse of power! :rolleyes:
Then, G. Nome does the same old bob-and-weave routine. Not answering the question. Let me explain how the Board works:
By the Goddess, when the Moderator of the Forum or the Administrators ask you a direct question about your behavior, there is no defense for not answering!
Anyhow. So then, manny posts:
Hmm…no name-calling, no accusations, no trash-talking, no over-the-top remarks. Just a plain, simple, elegant question with only two possible answers, in perfect English.
Then we see the old bob-and-weave again from G. Nome, and then Lynn has to come in. This sad little story will only have one possible ending unless G. Nome realizes that there are rules, rules must be followed, answer the damn question, and move on with life. Simple, elegant, and to the point. She can open a Pit thread if she feels slighted, picked on, or whatever. That’s what the Pit is there for, by definition.
Oh, ja wohl! I think I have my papers right here. :rolleyes:
One word to all the reactions to G. Nome’s post: overreaction.
And by god, if I it’s a requirement on this board that we’re required to explain ourselves to moderators on pain of banishment I’ll probably be removing SDMB from my bookmarks.
I think that G.Nome’s answer pretty clearly says ‘No, it was not a slur against gays’. If it’s that clear to me, it should be clear to them. I think that continuing to threaten G.Nome after G.Nome gave an adequate explanation because it was not in the one word format demanded is wrong.
I like boards to be well moderated, but lately I have been seeing more and more abuse of moderator power at these boards. If G.Nome get’s banned over this, I will join jayjay in finding a better place to post.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jayjay *
**
Oh, come off it. I took G. Nome’s comments almost exactly as manhattan did, except I thought G. Nome was mocking all AIDS victims rather than just homosexuals. And I’m sure we weren’t the only ones. The basic rule of these boards are “Don’t be an jerk”. And if G. Nome was mocking either gays or those with AIDS, she was in fact being an jerk, to the nth degree. And the moderators had every right to ask her to explain herself. She was asked in very simple terms to explain whether or not her post was as manhattan saw it, and she chose not to.
Exactly * where* did say this!? That’s just it, she was given the opportunity to say this, and she didn’t! All she had to say was, “Oh, I’m sorry my comments were taken that way. I’d be the last person in the world to mock AIDS victims. Of course that wasn’t what I meant.” But she said nothing like that!
I just joined this board, and now I’m starting to remember why I haven’t joined one in so long…discussions always deteriorate into this type of lame-o crap. G. made a joke. A bad, unfunny, lame, stupid, and certainly tasteless joke, but so what? This whole angry school marm thing the administrators are getting into is too much. G. said something dumb and is too pig-headed to apologize. Ignore her.
Now let’s bring things back to a great pop singer. Anyone ever noticed how a lot of “glass houses” sounds like Elvis Costello? Especially “I don’t want to be alone anymore” and “sleeping with the television on.” I can’t possibly have been the only Billy Joel fan to notice this.
Nope. Sorry. Saying, “Gee, I’m shocked that you could even suggest that I’d say such a thing” is NOT the same thing as saying “No, I did not say that”. Especially when someone *very specifically * requests a simple yes or no answer.
Back relatively on the topic: I saw Billy Joel in concert years ago, and he revealed that Robert Plant was in the audience. B.J. kept attempting to get Plant to come on stage by doing snippets of Zeppelin covers, which was pretty cool. Eventually, Plant did come up on stage, but he only ran across, waved to the audience, and got off again. No singing. Oh well.
I think claiming that it is an insult to be accused of something is a pretty effective denial - you would not say that if it was true.
I thought my summation was pretty clear.
manhattan did not accuse G. Nome of making a slur against gays or persons with AIDS. He did ask if she was, twice. If you can call the answers he received “answers”, well, maybe your linguistic skills far exceed mine.
jayjay, German reference aside (watch out my friend, you are very close to invoking Godwin’s Law here) I will be sorry to see you go. Because as has been pointed out in threads too numerous to mention, this Board is not a haven for unlimited free speach. It is not the Wild West. There are rules, rules are made and enforced by Moderators and Administrators, and I am sorry if this shatters your dream of Board-wide anarchy. But it is the Way that Things Are and Always Will Be here on the SDMB.
Badtz, I’m sorry but I must respectfully disagree with you. All that had to be done was to type one word: "yes’ or “no”, and this whole thing would have gone away.
[sub]In case you were wondering what Godwin’s Law is, it was defined by myself for use on the SDMB a long time ago as being:
[/sub]
Anamorphic wrote:
Would you mind explicating G. Nome’s remark to demonstrate how anyone was being “mocked?” A couple of people in this thread have agreed that they felt G. Nome was slamming homosexuals; would any of them care to offer an explication as well? In my opinion there is no way to interpret the comment in question as an insult to gays without basing said interpretation on the formula “AIDS=gays.” I really don’t see how it can be seen as an insult at all. Someone jumped to conclusions based on stereotypes, and the whole matter snowballed.
Anamorphic again:
I don’t think it’s unreasonable for G. Nome to feel that…
…is an authoritarian and accusatory demand that reflects a seriously flawed interpretation. In such a situation, it’s not unreasonable to refuse to comply. The very question is an insult and an abuse.
Anthracite:
I do apologize for the near-Nazi reference. I made the mistake of posting while I was still somewhat angry at the threats being made to G. Nome. At this time, I still think the dangling coercion of banishment is a severe overreaction, but I’m a bit calmer now.
I don’t believe there should be complete anarchy on this board. But even within a framework of rules, there is such a thing as the moderation team sliding over the line. I seriously don’t see how G. Nome’s remark is to be seen as a slur against gays or AIDS victims. It’s fairly well known that one way that HIV is transferred is by unprotected sex with an infected person. G. Nome made a joking remark that tied the current ambiguity of the word “bread” as slang in to seroconversion of HIV. While somewhat lame and not particularly funny, this isn’t a slur.
As a gay man myself, my diagnosis on this is that the moderation team (and several posters) seem to be drowning in PC. Last time I looked, saintliness was not a prerequisite for HIV infection, contrary to the popular hagiography of the disease. A remark that unsafe sex can cause AIDS, made in an impersonal manner (i.e., it was not aimed at a particular person (the impersonal ‘you’ was used)), is not a slur against anyone or anything.
I, as always, seriously urge those who are proponents of equal rights for those of all sexual orientations to please don’t fall into the purity trap. It hurts the gay community more than it helps. Some HIV is spread by unsafe sex. Some HIV is spread by unsafe gay sex. While blaming those who suffer from the disease for having it is wrong, pretending that everyone who has HIV or AIDS developed it by some mysterious magical circumstance in which they had no part whatsoever is worse. This is the kind of thing which makes PC (which, in its most useful and least controversial state, is simple courtesy) into such an object of derision and hatred for the right wing.
Sorry, I accidentally credited the quote in my last post to Anamorphic instead of its author, Anthracite.
Goodbye, and best of luck in your future endeavors.
To be clear: G. Nome is not in danger of being banned for an anti-gay slur. She is in danger of being banned for failing to cooperate with the moderators.
We are volunteers, with limited time to do our thing. If you do not cooperate you are gone. It’s pretty simple.
Having devolved from the OP to a discussion about the moderation of this message board, this thread is going to the Pit.
Well, I’ve never noticed it - but then, I haven’t really listened to Glass Houses that much, as I consider it one of Joel’s weakest albums. It’s too simple and lightweight, yet it lacks any of the “catchy” hits you find on other albums (“It’s still Rock n’ Roll to Me” is forgettable fluff, nothing more). Besides, Jewish guys from Long Island should not try to sing in French.
As for G.Nome - the problem with her is that she seems to have adopted an extremely annoying web persona, and she never steps out of character. That’s OK if you’re Al Pacino or Jim Carrey, but if you’re not, you’re just a jerk. This is a board for grownups, and if you don’t want to act like one, then you have no business being here.
Hey manhattan! Unfair!
An innocent, sensitive guy like me shouldn’t find himself in a situation where he steps into a thread in GQ and steps out into the Pit. My fragile psyche could be irreversably damaged.
Plus, I had just posted on subject. How cruel is that?
While the assiciation “AIDS=gays” is incorrect, the sad truth is that AIDS is, was, and always will be assocaited with homosexuality. Before it was called AIDS, it was called the gay cancer. When someone has AIDS, the immediate reaction is that the person is gay. The association may be incorrect, but it is there. If Rock Hudson had not died of complications due to AIDS, he probably would not have been outed.
Sweet Thundering Fuck.
Our problem child is at it again.
G. Nome, how hard was it to just answer with “yes” or “no”? Why must every misunderstanding you create (and if history is any indication, you create a shitload of misunderstandings) devolve into one of these Evil Moderator vs. Innocent Poster lovefests?
I hope you enjoy the attention, as long as it lasts. Dodgy Drama Queens aren’t the most desirable posters, as far as the administration is concerned. I’m sure quite a few posters would subscribe to that point of view as well.
While the interpretation of your initial remark could very well have been harmless, it’s not outrageous to consider it as slightly derogative as well. manhattan asked yuo to clarify that, plain and simple. YOU then took it upon you to make a fuss out of it. And all of a sudden, it’s a debate about moderators abusing their “power” again.
Real fucking charming.