It is actually displayed. The fact that you chose to filter your reading experience through a third party app is hardly their fault or their concern.
I prefer Bings.
Thank you, Shakes.
Acsenray, I don’t know where you are seeing sarcasm, and I acknowledge I assumed you’d see “Moderator Note,” only because it is plainly visible on the PC. However, I also use Tapatalk and am familiar with its limitations and quirks. It does not, for example, display the text if someone links a picture and makes the link a word. It puts the photo in-line, so you have no idea what the photo is, or whatever other info is being conveyed through the word-link.
Similarly when I occasionally do moderating while using Tapatalk, there is no box in which to type a title, so I just type Moderator Note or Warning in the body of the post.
Another thing Tapatalk does is always displays the sig line as a default. I have hunted around a bit to disable it, but I can’t seem to find it, but I am aware of this behavior.
The point is, I adapt, and I think you should too. It strikes me as a little disingenuous of you to suggest that I’d be bossing someone around just as a regular old poster. I’d think the default would be “Ellen is acting as moderator” in such an instance. It would also be clear if I am droning on about what I made for dinner, that would not be me acting as a moderator.
Straight Dope does sanction and encourage the use of Tapatalk — we want people to get to us as easily as possible! But don’t you agree you should accept a little responsibility for understanding how it behaves? I don’t know if any of the above is true for any Tapatalk app other than the one for iPhone. If they have one for android, it might be completely different. I’m just a volunteer moderator here and I don’t think there’s an expectation that I know all software possibilities and configurations that people may have.
I hope that helps us understand one another!
And I like my Smurfs sober.
I actually don’t recall trying to assign “fault” for anything. I observed that I did not see the note, and when I discovered why I didn’t see it, I posted the explanation. And what I actually said was “it was not displayed when I read the note,” which is factually 100 percent true.
I’m not sure why you think this is a point arguing over.
Perhaps I’m seeing it where it wasn’t meant, but that’s a common problem when communicating with people through text over the internet.
To me, “Here it is. Take a look.” seemed sarcastic. If it wasn’t meant to be, that’s fine with me. Now, however, what I don’t get is the responses by Inner Stickler and Shakes, which again seem, if not sarcastic, at least a little bit hostile and condescending.
I am also aware of some of its limitations and quirks, but as of today, I was not aware of this one. (Again, I am detecting condescension in this portion of your post, which might or might not be the case, but I’m willing to let that go.) In reporting the discovery of this quirk, I’ll admit I expected a different reaction, along the lines of — “Odd. I didn’t know that. Maybe we might rethink using the ‘title’ line for important things like moderator’s notes.”
Regardless, I think that the SDMB staff, which, I must repeat, encourages the use of Tapatalk—to the extent that for at least some period of time whenever I tried to access the boards on the browser, there was a pop up encouraging Tapatalk’s use, and at least one thread in ATMB asking users to report an Tapatalk glitches—should at the ver least care what the user’s experience is on Tapatalk and whether Tapatalk users might be missing important content.
Regardless of whether the staff decides that any actual action is needed in response, I would not expect the reaction would be along the lines of "Well, you’re an idiot for using a third-party app. Don’t bother me with any problems you might have. Man-up and take your punishment. Or you going to cry? Is cry-baby going to cry? Huh? Huh? Cry for me baby! (Okay I think I just channeled A Christmas Story there for a second, but I’m fine.)
I’m not sure how I am expected to adapt to a problem prior to discovering its existence. And, yes, when I made the problem known in this thread, what I expected as a response was “Let’s us as a community discuss what might be the best way to react to this new information, if anything.”
What I seem to be getting instead seems more along the lines of “You’re a chump and you’re acting like a teen-ager trying to get out of detention with a bad excuse.”
I was expressing genuine lack of understanding of the facts of the situation, and given that you now know that I did not see “Moderator’s Note” displayed, I should think that this would be sufficient information for you. Perhaps this is another revelation of the limitation of communicating through text over the internet.
It was not clear to me, so I sought clarification. I don’t know how simpler the situation could be. Once a conversation has been initiated, I don’t see any relevance of a default. I don’t think my OP was accusatory or insulting in any way. It was a straight question, to which I expected a straight answer.
This verbiage is again puzzling to me. “Accept responsibility?” Really? Have I been caught speeding and I’m now trying to make the excuse that I didn’t see the speed limit sign? I observed an interation between a moderator and a non-moderator and I asked for clarification because I didn’t understand what exactly was going on. When I discovered the reason for my confusion, I am being asked to “accept responsibility”? For what exactly?
I don’t think anyone has implied such an expectation. However, once this glitch had been revealed, I would have expected a different reaction. If not “Let’s think about the best way to confront this new information,” at least a neutral, “Oh, that’s why you didn’t see it. I understand now.”
Isn’t that a false dichotomy?
I would be perfectly logical for me to be considered an idiot for other reasons, of course.
I’m not going to recap what Ascenray said. I don’t even use Tapatalk. But I agree that it would make for better clarity if mods would post that they are acting as a moderator in the body of the post instead of in the subject line above it. They could bold and offset it, but just something as simple as:
It would attract attention that a moderator is making an official prononcement, and everyone would see it whether they are using a browser or an app to view the Dope.
I know most mods do that, anyway, but it would help to keep everybody on the same page.
Is it my imagination, or was there talk back and forth a couple years back about this, with some posters wanting the words “Moderator Note” to be put in the title because the bolding would stand out?
I’d hope your imagination could do better.
I just looked at SDMB on my Android phone using tapatalk. You are correct that Moderator Note isn’t there.
And thanks for being cool about my kidding.
Bwaaaaahahah.
So: “embarrassing” wet spot is A-OK, but “glistening” wet spot puts you in Penthouse territory??? Jesus. Jesus H. Christ.
I guess “pink” wet spot would really be out of the question.
Pink wet spot would be a red tent female only discussion, sorry Charlie.
Because of one thread? I wouldn’t say this thread constitutes raking over the coals. I don’t see the problem with her moderation of that post. Other posters don’t seem to either. Clear, and it addresses the posted rules.
While I’m here, and since the other thread got closed and I didn’t get to say it there, thanks Ellen for reversing your ruling. You are and always have been my favorite mod. Taking the time to genuinely consider all sides makes you the bestest.
Needs said again.
I haven’t quoted the whole post, since it’s long. But in reference to the full post, don’t you think it’s a strange mixture of defending yourself against others who have read a stronger meaning in your words than you intended, and you inferring stronger meanings than are probably intended in others’ words?
Dude, seriously? You didn’t see the modding bit because you’re on Tapatalk, but now you know it’s there. So let’s move on.
I think it was more of a preemptive strike rather than a response to the actual merit. The “glistening” struck some people a bit too anticipatory, and Ellen was reminding folks on the thread to stay within bounds rather than follow the lead where it might take some. That’s my take, anyway.
If you were using Tapatalk, you’d know that he already announced he was moving on!
So, Ellen Cherry is cooking glistening Tapatalk for dinner. I’m glad we cleared that up.