# Bullshit modding in the IMHO avatar thread (yeah, you knew it was coming) **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 3, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393 "2011-08-03T23:23:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/41 "2011-08-04T15:11:27Z")
> [@srzss05](#): > > Then compromise as one other poster said. Put a mod note in the title saying further comments aren’t needed. I too wondered why he just didn’t lock it. I was this \>\< close to asking the same thing a few minutes after he posted that note. The OP of that thread stated comments weren’t needed, and directed posters to the ATMB thread. I’d be surprised if someone posted in a thread of that nature without reading the OP. That said, **bucketybuck** , who started the thread, has stated that he thinks **Czarcasm** went way over the top in his response. I agree, but that doesn’t justify ignoring the mod note. Ignoring mod instructions is, and should remain, a warnable offence, and if people have problems with the instructions, it should be discussed in ATMB. This is one of the few boards I’ve seen where discussion of moderator activities is permitted, in many places one would be expected to follow the instructions or GTFO. As for not reading the note, tough. Read the thread before posting. ---
**Author:** ![SoulFrost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f07891/32.png) [@SoulFrost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SoulFrost)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/42 "2011-08-04T15:15:23Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Regardless of whether this particular warning is justified, I don’t see “I didn’t see the warning because it’s my policy not to read X-type threads” as being an acceptable excuse. It’s perfectly acceptable. I don’t know many people who read an entire poll thread before voting and posting the usually-expected comment. It’s not a Great Debate, it’s just a poll. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/43 "2011-08-04T15:16:24Z")
> [@Erdosain](#): > > I agree, but what is the point of leaving a thread open when what qualifies as acceptable commentary is unclear and completely up to one moderator’s whims? That might be a valid topic of discussion, but I don’t think that negates the basis for the warning, which is failure to comply with a mod note. “I don’t read poll threads” is not a valid excuse. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/44 "2011-08-04T15:16:45Z")
> [@SoulFrost](#): > > It’s perfectly acceptable. I don’t know many people who read an entire poll thread before voting and posting the usually-expected comment. It’s not a Great Debate, it’s just a poll. Any chance of a comment from a passing mod on this, as there seems to be some disagreement. ---
**Author:** ![srzss05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@srzss05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/srzss05)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/45 "2011-08-04T15:22:27Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Any chance of a comment from a passing mod on this, as there seems to be some disagreement. People do it all the time, not just on this board but others as well, and not just in polls. It isn’t an excuse for not reading a mod instruction, though. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/46 "2011-08-04T15:25:55Z")
> [@srzss05](#): > > People do it all the time, not just on this board but others as well, and not just in polls. It isn’t an excuse for not reading a mod instruction, though. Sorry, I meant a comment from a mod as to whether it’s an excuse for not heeding a mod note, not whether it’s acceptable to post in a thread you’ve not read. ---
**Author:** ![Rachellelogram](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rachellelogram/32/8689_2.png) [@Rachellelogram](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rachellelogram)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/47 "2011-08-04T15:30:43Z")
Whether or not I read the mod note is not germane to the fact that if he didn’t want people to keep posting opinions in an IMHO thread, it should have been locked. That is an unreasonable rule on the opinion subforum. Again, I posit my prior example of a mod demanding no name-calling in a pit thread. When you decide to issue a note that subverts the long-standing purpose of a subforum, you’re setting people up to be warned en masse–which is \*exactly \*what happened. He built a tiger pit and I happened to fall into it. > [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Because locking the thread closes the poll, and he didn’t want to end the poll. I would think that was obvious. Then that is a limitation of the board. Again, if we aren’t to post opinions in an opinion thread, the mod in question has an obligation to lock it. Then, in a perfect world, the mod should have his lack of neutrality discussed. The complete lack of input from other mods in this thread is indicative. I hope this is being hashed out behind the scenes, and anticipate that warning revocations will be coming shortly. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/48 "2011-08-04T15:33:06Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Sorry, I meant a comment from a mod as to whether it’s an excuse for not heeding a mod note, not whether it’s acceptable to post in a thread you’ve not read. It’s not a valid excuse, otherwise mod notes couldn’t be enforced, could they? it’s (sort of) like blowing through a stop sign-“How can you give me a ticket if I didn’t bother to notice the sign?” isn’t going to make the officer put the ticket book away. If it boils down to a poster’s personal habits versus the rules as they now stand, I’m afraid we’ll have to stick to the rules…within reason, of course. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/49 "2011-08-04T15:38:19Z")
> [@](#): > > within reason, of course. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/50 "2011-08-04T15:43:15Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It’s not a valid excuse, otherwise mod notes couldn’t be enforced, could they? it’s (sort of) like blowing through a stop sign-“How can you give me a ticket if I didn’t bother to notice the sign?” isn’t going to make the officer put the ticket book away. If it boils down to a poster’s personal habits versus the rules as they now stand, I’m afraid we’ll have to stick to the rules…within reason, of course. It’s not quite the same as that, given that this is a message board so life and property aren’t at stake. Given the relatively lower importance of message-board posting, I’m wondering if warnings need to be handed out willy-nilly in a situation like that, or if there’s some other, less dictatorial way of handling it. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/51 "2011-08-04T15:43:36Z")
> [@rachelellogram](#): > > Whether or not I read the mod note is not germane to the fact that if he didn’t want people to keep posting opinions in an IMHO thread, it should have been locked. How can it _not_ be germane to this thread? It seems to be the reason you started this thread. Again, I have to ask: If a Moderator Note, followed by two Official Warnings that immediately preceded your post(so it wasn’t like they were hard to see) wasn’t enough of a clue, just because you say you didn’t see any of it, well…what _does_ it take? I honestly want to know. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/52 "2011-08-04T15:47:39Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It’s not a valid excuse, otherwise mod notes couldn’t be enforced, could they? it’s (sort of) like blowing through a stop sign-“How can you give me a ticket if I didn’t bother to notice the sign?” isn’t going to make the officer put the ticket book away. If it boils down to a poster’s personal habits versus the rules as they now stand, I’m afraid we’ll have to stick to the rules…within reason, of course. Maybe the rules for a poll should be different. I know these don’t even approach “scientific”, but still, to answer a poll honestly you _shouldn’t_ know what the other respondents are saying. Isn’t that why you can’t see the results of the poll until after you’ve voted? I don’t suppose there’s a tech solution, is there? A thread that _only_ allows votes to a poll, but not posts in response? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/53 "2011-08-04T15:49:40Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > It’s not quite the same as that, given that this is a message board so life and property aren’t at stake. Given the relatively lower importance of message-board posting, I’m wondering if warnings need to be handed out willy-nilly in a situation like that, or if there’s some other, less dictatorial way of handling it. Do you mean like a Final Warning, followed by a Final Final Warning, followed by a _Really_ Final Final Warning? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/54 "2011-08-04T15:52:35Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Maybe the rules for a poll should be different. I know these don’t even approach “scientific”, but still, to answer a poll honestly you _shouldn’t_ know what the other respondents are saying. Isn’t that why you can’t see the results of the poll until after you’ve voted? > > I don’t suppose there’s a tech solution, is there? A thread that _only_ allows votes to a poll, but not posts in response? We would have to sticky it near the top-poll votes alone won’t keep it from sinking. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/55 "2011-08-04T15:54:11Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > It’s not quite the same as that, given that this is a message board so life and property aren’t at stake. Given the relatively lower importance of message-board posting, I’m wondering if warnings need to be handed out willy-nilly in a situation like that, or if there’s some other, less dictatorial way of handling it. One thing that’s been suggested before, and may have been helpful in this case, would be editing either the thread title or the OP to draw attention to the mod note. If people still ignore it then, the mods should be free to bring down the thunder without criticism. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/56 "2011-08-04T15:55:09Z")
> [@rachelellogram](#): > > Whether or not I read the mod note is not germane to the fact that if he didn’t want people to keep posting opinions in an IMHO thread, it should have been locked. That is an unreasonable rule on the opinion subforum. It’s entirely warranted in some situations–this was one of them. Mods have always done more than just enforce black-letter rules, they often get involved in directing the tenor and nature of threads. There was still an outlet for opinions/debate about avatars–in fact, this particular direction to post all of it in the ATMB thread made it easier to follow the varying opinions and arguments. Note I say that as someone who shifted his opinion about the things. > [@Sarahfeena](#): > > It’s not quite the same as that, given that this is a message board so life and property aren’t at stake. Given the relatively lower importance of message-board posting, I’m wondering if warnings need to be handed out willy-nilly in a situation like that, or if there’s some other, less dictatorial way of handling it. Yeah. Given the low impact of a warning, with its explanation/context in the poster’s history, and the relative infrequency of _actual_ consequences (suspending/banning), such vehement outrage and hue and cry is entirely unnecessary. (On preview: not accusing you of a hue and cry or saying that discussing actions isn’t acceptable.) ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/57 "2011-08-04T15:55:50Z")
Hadn’t thought about that. I wouldda thought that voting itself would bump the thread back up, but I’ve never looked to find out. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/58 "2011-08-04T15:57:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Do you mean like a Final Warning, followed by a Final Final Warning, followed by a _Really_ Final Final Warning? Sure, that’s exactly what I meant. Actually, I meant that maybe it might occur to you that if you’ve given a bunch of warnings in a row, maybe the reason random posters are still violating the instruction is due to some factor other than deliberately ignoring you. Maybe due to the nature of the thread, they didn’t read through the whole thing (like Rachel did). Maybe they didn’t understand exactly what people were getting warned for (which I think happened to some other people in that thread). My suggestion was that it might be more effective if you just posted again with a clarification and/or reminder, without giving out Official Warnings. People tend to respond to those without getting all pissed off about it. ETA: > [@Steophan](#): > > One thing that’s been suggested before, and may have been helpful in this case, would be editing either the thread title or the OP to draw attention to the mod note. If people still ignore it then, the mods should be free to bring down the thunder without criticism. That’s a good idea, too. ---
**Author:** ![SoulFrost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f07891/32.png) [@SoulFrost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SoulFrost)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/59 "2011-08-04T15:59:08Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It’s not a valid excuse, otherwise mod notes couldn’t be enforced, could they? it’s (sort of) like blowing through a stop sign-“How can you give me a ticket if I didn’t bother to notice the sign?” isn’t going to make the officer put the ticket book away. If it boils down to a poster’s personal habits versus the rules as they now stand, I’m afraid we’ll have to stick to the rules…within reason, of course. Nah, that’s crap. What you did is more akin to some cop deciding that the road’s speed limit is ten MPH lower than posted, then ticketing you. If you’re going to change the generally accepted rules in mid-thread, then you need to edit the thread’s title to reflect those changes. The generally accepted rules for polls is that you vote if you feel like it, then post a comment explaining why you voted as you did. Almost nobody reads the damn things first, which is why they suck as a means of determining board policy. You have been wrong on every single point regarding that thread so far, from letting the OP determine the rules of the thread to changing the normal poll commentary procedure in mid-thread, from handing out ridiculous warnings to defending your actions here. It if were a GD or GQ thread, I’d agree with you, since reading the posts is expected. Not so with an IMHO poll. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393/60 "2011-08-04T16:02:39Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > …Yeah. Given the low impact of a warning, with its explanation/context in the poster’s history, and the relative infrequency of _actual_ consequences (suspending/banning), such vehement outrage and hue and cry is entirely unnecessary. > > (On preview: not accusing you of a hue and cry or saying that discussing actions isn’t acceptable.) I wouldn’t characterize a warning as low impact. I’ve accumulated a couple over the years, so I’m not particularly concerned about immanent banning, But since there’s no fixed number of warnings before a banning, any one warning should be of concern. As it is meant to be. And Czarcasm, you haven’t addressed part of my last post – that to answer a poll more honestly, you should not see/read the other replies before responding in order to avoid bias. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bullshit-modding-in-the-imho-avatar-thread-yeah-you-knew-it-was-coming/591393.md?page=4)