[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
**cranston ** doesn’t appear to be banned. He was suspended for a couple of days, that’s all.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. Which time has passed.
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
Walter, this post by Stinkpalm is unsympathetic. It’s also constructive: if skeptic thinks she’ll be in retail for a while, she really does need to man up. Carol’s post, OTOH, was a rude dismissal of the OP on the basic grounds that it was a rant about work.
It was jerkish.
In fact, I’d almost put it in the same general class as the poster who, on seeing a thread entitled “My baby died”, chose to pick a nit and say, “Excuse me, but it wasn’t a baby.” Not comparing working BF to a failed pregnancy, mind you, but objecting to the fact of an OP is very different from objecting to the content.
[/QUOTE]
Aha, you’ve reminded me what the previous case was! Seeing that the OP was the first post on the board by that user, observed that it was pretty weird to come in with such a personal item to a group of strangers. Which I still believe.
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
Walter, this post by Stinkpalm is unsympathetic. It’s also constructive: if skeptic thinks she’ll be in retail for a while, she really does need to man up. Carol’s post, OTOH, was a rude dismissal of the OP on the basic grounds that it was a rant about work.
[/QUOTE]
…and that anyone sympathetic must like “teen angst”, whatever that is.
So, briefly:
Pit OP: Holy fuck, the shoppers are batshit crazy!
Not Jerkish: “Well, sorry, but that’s the nature of the beast; you really need to learn to take the heat or you won’t make it: you’re paid to perform well every day no matter what.”
Jerkish: “Waaa, Waaa, Waaa, you spoiled teenager.”
And definitely, I’d rather have the Mods and Admins exercising their best judgement rather than adopting some sort of formulaic one-size-fits-nobody straitjacket recipe for when you’re disciplined or not.
[QUOTE=Walter Windchill]
Aha, you’ve reminded me what the previous case was! Seeing that the OP was the first post on the board by that user, observed that it was pretty weird to come in with such a personal item to a group of strangers. Which I still believe.
[/QUOTE]
Does everyone have to pass your litmus test to be allowed to post?
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
Does everyone have to pass your litmus test to be allowed to post?
[/QUOTE]
Nope. I don’t believe that, which is why I never said anything remotely like that. But I appreciate your asking for clarification.
What’d you make that comment for, then?
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
What’d you make that comment for, then?
[/QUOTE]
Which comment is that?
This comment.
[QUOTE=Walter Windchill]
Aha, you’ve reminded me what the previous case was! Seeing that the OP was the first post on the board by that user, observed that it was pretty weird to come in with such a personal item to a group of strangers. Which I still believe.
[/QUOTE]
By what reading of that statement would you possibly conclude that I might want to ban such posts?
Carol Stream’s home page.
You know damned well what I meant. Don’t reframe the discussion.
And that, of course, was for Walter.
There seems to be a lot of this lately: people objecting to the fact that someone posted, not the content of their post. Don’t hide behind “I didn’t call for banning…”. Calling the failed-pregnancy poster a liar was jerkish. Yes, I know it wasn’t you, but it was jerkish, and you’re defending jerkish behavior.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean. By what possible interpretation of “I found this behavior weird,” would a reasonable person conclude that I meant to say, “I myself have sole authority over what should and should not be posted”? Is it the practice here to use the word “weird” only in some Shakespearean way that means “evil, objectionable, and wicked”?
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
And that, of course, was for Walter.
There seems to be a lot of this lately: people objecting to the fact that someone posted, not the content of their post. Don’t hide behind “I didn’t call for banning…”. Calling the failed-pregnancy poster a liar was jerkish. Yes, I know it wasn’t you, but it was jerkish, and you’re defending jerkish behavior.
[/QUOTE]
Cite that I objected to the “fact someone posted.”
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
Don’t hide behind “I didn’t call for banning…”
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I can see how people hiding behind the facts can be quite annoying when you accuse them of doing something they never did.
Sigh…
You know, a minute ago, I was wondering why I was still wasting time on this, since it will almost certainly lose momentum and be over by tomorrow morning by the latest. But then I realized that there’s just going to be another one of these before long.
Walter, it is NOT ABOUT AUTHORITY. It’s about ATTITUDE. It is about posters, not just you, picking on people who want to air gripes, or share sad news, or talk about a TV show that they like. It’s called thread-shitting, and it’s being a jerk. And it’s happening a lot.
And I don’t understand why. Why pass judgement on someone because their first post was about a personal tragedy? Why snipe at someone on the boards because you think their Pit thread is too MPSIMSy, instead of reporting it to a mod? Why take a combative stance with other posters? Why be a jerk?
0n preview: By “fact”, I meant, for instance, Carol Stream (not you) objecting to the fact that skeptic chose to Pit Black Friday. CS was complaining about the action, if you will, of skeptic opening a Pit thread about BF, not the content of the OP. And that’s unnecessary. And jerkish.
And on preview again, I did not accuse you of calling for banning. I wanted to know exactly what kind of OPs would make this a pleasant board for you to enjoy. This board really seems to get under your nerves, and I’d hate for you to be unncessarily disturbed by other posters.
And I’m about to go out, so I won’t see your reply for a few hours.
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
**cranston ** doesn’t appear to be banned. He was suspended for a couple of days, that’s all.
[/QUOTE]
Oh glad to hear it. I get half my wish anyway.
[QUOTE=Walter Windchill]
Interesting distinction. I don’t really take “you’re a vile and nasty person,” to mean, “Well, we may have a disagreement, but I eagerly anticipate a friendly debate on the topic.”
[/QUOTE]
Of course, that was my post and I did not just call her vile and nasty and leave it at that. I questioned her posting style. I would say I rebuked her. I have additionally confronted her in at least one prior thread for very similar behavior.
The complete context of my post was very unfriendly, however it did leave room for discussion and explanation.
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
Do you ever not jump in a thread to just piss and moan about others? You seemed to be a vile and nasty person who gets off on snarking on others with the remoteness of the Internet.
Just a nasty, small hearted Jerk!
What is your problem?
Along with a well made rant, **myskepticsight ** actually managed to give us some insight into Black Friday retail that was interesting.
Please go climb back under your bridge.
[/QUOTE]
*Until she states otherwise I will assume a poster named Carol is a female and use the feminine pronoun. It is too difficult to work around basic pronoun use in this thread. *
Jim {BTW: you forgot to mention I also called her a Jerk, I have seen no proof she is not a jerk.}
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
Walter, it is NOT ABOUT AUTHORITY. It’s about ATTITUDE. It is about posters, not just you, picking on people who want to air gripes, or share sad news, or talk about a TV show that they like. It’s called thread-shitting, and it’s being a jerk. And it’s happening a lot.
[/quote]
The use of the expression, “not just you,” implies that I do so pick on people. I have done no such thing. I have only taken the milquetoast position in pit threads that spin off of these behavior.
I don’t know why they don’t bypass the threads entirely, so I’m agreed with you on that.
So it is. I never said it wasn’t. I was merely observing that all kinds of jerkish behavior goes unchecked.
I doubt that you are so concerned about my happiness, but thanks anyway.