See, I’m just not seeing this. I read Tuba’s post as “not my cup of tea, but don’t let me stand in your way”, i.e. an attempt at diplomacy by recognizing Cajun Man’s objections to thread while acknowledging the fact that their preferences don’t solely shape what’s OK to talk about.
But whatever. If you’re upset at what Tuba said when she reopened that thread, that’s your right and this is the place to talk about it. I just don’t think a complaint about word choice and/or tone automatically requires a response. If it was me being complained about, and my response was “I didn’t mean anything by it and I think you’re being unreasonable to complain”, I might just choose to keep that to myself rather than fan the flames.
But I am trying to understand where your confusion lies, and you’re just repeating the mantra of “I am a customer who needs an explanation”. It would be easier for you to get one, if that’s what you really want, if you could give some indication of what you’re confused about and/or are looking for from Cajun Man.
You are a mod, though, so your perception of what happened is likely diffferent from everyone else’s. And in any case, if it really was an attempt at diplomacy, which obviously did not carry the tone that was intended, then why would a person not want to come back and explain that? I sure would. Posters do that all the time.
Actually, my original Pit thread was the place to talk about it, but that thread was shut down, too (with another “attempt at diplomacy” that apparently backfired). So a new thread had to be started to talk about it. Are you starting to see why people got annoyed by the dodging?
Then why not say, “I didn’t mean anything by it and I’m sorry if it it didn’t come out that way,” which would dampen the flames rather than fan them?
I know you are, and I know you have. I realize that I do not use the formal language of analogics, and I’d enjoy discussing it with you sometime, preferably over a beer. And not in the Pit.
Yes, I realize that. But so what? An exaggerated analogy can be useful for rhetorical purposes. There’s a point when it becomes so exaggerated as to become silly.
Yes, in his analogy, I’d likely have a giant-fonted, bold-faced WTF moment. If God Himself snapped me up and then dropped me back to earth without an explanation I’d be somewhat shaken. Is that an appropriate analogy as well?
Sure. But that’s the actual reality of the situation, and the overwrought analogy is unnecessary and serves no purpose except to compare a message board moderator to a cop. The example provides a hypothetical WTF moment, the reality of the situation is BFD.
.
All of which is easily remedied by him saying what was on his mind.
Okay, how about a bouncer? Is that okay? Or how about a production assistant in a TV studio? Or a fat old security fart at Wal-Mart? Is that low enough for you? So, he tells you don’t do that again, and closes off the area you were in. He goes away, and shortly a manager comes and reopens the area, saying he’s not crazy about what you did either, but that he’s letting you back in anyway. You still don’t know why the fat fart bothered you in the first place. Don’t know about you, but I’ve seen pittings for far less bizarre interactions.
My true confusion lies in any defense of them not providing an explanation for THEIR OWN ACTIONS. Particularly when asked. Why is that so hard to understand? I admit that your explanation was reasonable—so reasonable that is likely to be true—thereby lessening the great curiosity over their decisions. But why should it fall to you to explain (guess at) a colleague’s actions. And why should we have to be satisfied with a “Yeah, that’s probably it” when the people are alive and breathing and still part of the SDMB staff? To clarify, my interest, i.e., puzzlement, has had little to do with the actual posts that sprouted this thread, but with the seemingly flat refusal for someone, particularly a Mod, to explain his own actions. THAT I find pathetic, unhealthy for the Board, and BAFFLING.
Disclaimer: no cups of tea were hurt in the writing of this post.
nor on TubaDiva’s, as far as I can tell. Here are her two posts:
and
Now, I will concede that this being written word, without the benefit of verbal cues, half of the tone of a post is contributed by the reader. That said, I think there is general agreement that those read as dismissive. And I don’t consider myself as particularly thin-skinned or oversensitive.
I appreciate the efforts to tone it down to “this is not my cup of tea”, but I don’t think that is what was going on through TubaDiva’s mind. My guess it was more like “Oops, a mod screwed up and he is not here to fix it himself, let me try to cover for him”. So she tries to correct it without saying there was a mistake to correct. Call it a Circling of Wagons Lite, if you must.
The fact remains that she tried to fix a thread closing with another thread closing. Is anyone surprised that the reaction was not positive?
ETA: Let me know if you are having trouble hearing me over all the slapping. I can retype this in All Caps, if needed.
All the more because the reverse would not be tolerated. If a mod were asking you for a clarification so he could make a rules decision, and you ignored his question but instead sat back watching as Tom, Dick, and Harry offered up “possibilities” about your intentions, there wouldn’t likely be much official patience about it. Same same for people who have a genuine desire to follow the board’s rules and guidelines, and are merely asking for a clarification about a mod decision or action so they can open a thread with reasonable confidence that they’re not pushing some button or treading close to some unknown precipice.
CajunMan got up on the wrong side of the bed and decided to take it out on someone. CajunMan thought there was a quota of thread closings and since it was nearing the end of the month, was trying to get his quota met. CajunMan thought that any thread which got 1 or more complaints was automatically closed. CajunMan was sending pizzabrat a love tap PM and hit submit instead and to cover up his mistake closed the thread. CajunMan doesn’t like the idea that people from other countries have sex. . .it should only be Cajuns. CajunMan thinks that it’s repulsive that Cajuns are having sex and didn’t want to see any on the list. CajunMan thought that no one notices these thread closings, so he decided to close one with no reason to see what would happen.
I could go on all day. But the point is that your guess is as good as mine. Only CajunMan knows the real answer. Maybe he can come in here and pick one. . . or more.
I’m more surprised that people are getting so upset over simple questions.
If you didn’t want to fan the flames, you could stop at “I didn’t mean anything by it.”
On preview: Sarahfeena already said that last part, but I’m leaving it. Man, you guys type fast!
Precisely. I think at this point it has become a battle of wills. “Those damn posters can’t MAKE ME explain myself. Hmmph!” There is simply no reasonable defense to not do so. Even if they think it is unnecessary, some members disagree, so why not provide an explanation. Heavens knows that all of us at some time thought something was clear but were asked for clarification. A response of the silent treatment is rarely a good one.
Well, if we’re getting into analogies… Some guy at work, call him Joe, who is normally easy-going, suddenly blows up over what you think is a trivial matter. Later on you see him doing his job normally, interacting with other workers normally, life going on. Do you:
A) buttonhole Joe and DEMAND that he explain why he blew up earlier?
b) think “Whew! Glad that’s blown over” and let it go?
My guess (based on absolutely nothing) is that Cajun Man had a Bad Day. You know, one of his kids had a stomach flu, and he was up all night changing sheets. The milk he poured on his Wheaties turned out to have gone sour. The cat horked up a hairball into his briefcase. As he drove to work the ‘check oil’ light came on, the fifth time that week and he’d had the mechanic look at it only two days ago. Whatever. The point was, he was stressed and in a bad mood. A thread he might normally found iffy seemed worse to him in the circumstances and it became the target for his ire.
<<shrug>> It’s a human enough way to behave. I’ve never met Cajun Man, but my guess is he’s human.
Maybe the rest of us should consider this an easy opportunity to practice being divine and let it go, yes?
But doesn’t this assume that he didn’t have a good reason? I don’t think that is fair to him.
But if, as you say, he had a bad day, a simple: “Oops, I was having a bad day, the particualrs of which I’d rather not go into. Fortunatley, Tuba was there to save things. My apologies and thanks.” would satisfy everyone.
I PMd him to let him know there was a Pit thread, and that we would appreciate it if he would come by and let us know his reasoning behind closing it, and what he meant by “this” when he said “don’t do this again.” He never came by the thread, as we all know, and never answered my PM.
I’d pick option C) which is the one I think Sapo chose for this OP.
C) Hey Joe, looks like something triggered you to blow up there. Mind telling us what that was so we don’t do it again?
To which Joe could reply, ‘No man, I was just having a bad day. No worries.’
Easy peasy.
But if some of the executive management team and some of my co-workers showed up yelling at me to “Let It Go!,” I’d have some serious concerns about the organization.
