Bizarre Warning Issued

Here’s the link to the thread, as well as the OP I was responding to quoted in its entirety:

In response, I asked the following rhetorical question:

For that I received the following response from a moderator:

What am I missing here? Have the rules here changed drastically of late? I’ve been here for 19 years and I don’t recall seeing a warning issued for such trivial matters before.

I don’t believe there was a request for debate, it was someone sharing something personal. When I first read your comment, I quickly scanned ahead to see if it was already addressed bu a moderator.

And, it was likely not trivial to the OP.

Yeah, that’s a fucked up warning.
With all the woke discussions we’ve had on this board lately. It makes sense someone would ask that question. It’s a perfectly valid question.

The OP in that that thread offered us nothing of substance about the lady of his affection. Just: She’s pretty…

Is that not objectification?

Name me one person who has had a youthful crush on someone they didn’t find attractive? 1 in a 1000?
Naturally a person would lament a crush’s passing.
To call someone out by saying “ah but you haven’t lamented others who were plain looking person” is beyond the pale. How do you know the OP hasn’t done that? Because it wasn’t shared here? Maybe that crush gave the OP their 1st kiss? Who knows?

Human emotions?

For reference, here’s a similar recent thread from the same forum:

to which a response that simply read

did not receive an official warning, or even a reminder to keep it civil from the moderator.

No, that’s 100% total threadshitting, and being “woke” has nothing to do with it. The Op also included *"I hadn’t seen her in almost forty years. This morning, I found out she died yesterday.

She is by no means the first of my school ‘circle’ to die, but her death has made me well up more than once now."

Let’s be real here, we’re not talking about the guy’s wife. We’re talking about some girl he had a crush on over forty years ago when he was 16. I think there’s enough separation there; we can have this conversation.

Not without being outrageously insensitive. The guy is writing about the loss of someone he cared about. That is not the appropriate place to attack him with this agenda driven bullshit. Let the guy eulogize his former crush in peace.

People who make negative remarks in eulogy/memorial threads are always dinged for threadshitting. That’s been going on at least as long as I’ve been here—I can think of a couple of examples off the top of my head. There’s nothing bizarre about that warning.

I consider it a violation of the official rule, “Don’t be a jerk.”

Having a crush on somebody is “caring” about them to the degree we need to give them a safe space them to “mourn”. :rolleyes:

That was the epitome of threadshitting. I can’t understand how you can’t see how mean and petty that was.

If the OP had posted something like: “I just found out an old high school friend of mine has died. I went through some rough patches as a kid, and this girl was always there for me to help sort it out…”

That would be different. That’s a REAL human connection. Crying about some girl you had a crush on is not.


TBH, my first thought when I read the OP of the thread in question was something like, “gosh, didn’t he have anything else to say about her except that she was physically attractive?” But I certainly never contemplated posting that thought in the thread. As I tried to teach my son when he was growing up, not every thought you have needs to be verbalized.

Yep. We dont have to drag agenda driven bullshit into every thread.

Next some guy will be mourning the death of his dog and people will be popping int to call that slavery and he is evil for being a pet slaver.

Or some one will be posting about “best hamburgers” and people will be giving them a hard time about being evil meat eaters.

Agenda has it’s place. It’s place isnt *everywhere. *

Should’ve been separated by putting

in the Pit.

Yeah. Why not?

You post was an inappropriate threadshit, and while not against the rules you lose additional points for virtue signalling.

The above quoted post was nowhere near the same thing. I’m not sure why that’s not obvious but I’ll explain anyway. The OP specifically asked for advice, it involved a contemporary situation and the OP wasn’t mourning a death.

This is why it’s disgusting to use a pejorative term like “safe space” to describe abstinence from needling a person about the viability of their grief, when that is grief over someone they cared about who passed away. So what if you think they had a shallow reason to care about that person?