So, general evaluation: Jerk, edging on being a troll, and a flaming pain in the ass.
That specific comment, I read, thought, “Damn, what an ass.” Reread, “My god, he actually has, yeah, okay, there’s a point there, but why did he phrase it like… oh. County.” That post may have been his most on topic post he ever made. And from any other user it would have been call for a pit thread.
Think about that, would you? Is he making any contribution to the Board? Less than December? Less than Collunsbury? Hell yes, less. So, he was warned, he was warned, he’s gone. Maybe that specific post didn’t deserve it, but all the others certainly did.
County was a dickhead, but an amusing and sometimes thought provoking dickhead.
There are other dickheads who are continualy jerkish, never thought provoking and always jerkisk, yet they still remain??
One wonders how many jerkish things a certain rah-rah-flag-waving-republican-presidential-supporting poster can make while being a jerk and yet still be allowed to stay.
At least County admitted when he was wrong.
On the flipside it would be a bad thing if we all agreed.
Either way County made me grimace but in a good way (that other chap just needs to be gone though…he’s far to “clever” for that to happen though. long may he act like a rabid righty though…someone has to)
I guess that I am not getting what the deep mystery is here. As far as I can tell it is not really that difficult to keep your status as a member in good standing. I also fail to see what is so ominous about posters that have a full and rich history of being jerks finally getting the axe.
It seems to me that what a lot of folks are looking for is one specific post that is ban worthy. While that does happen, I really don’t have a problem with a pattern of behavior being the cause either (in fact, I think that this is probably the more common case).
I have a secret. Follow me over here. Now don’t tell anyone, but reading the 2 posts right after the one you quoted may help explain. Ssshhh…don’t tell anyone.
Maybe so Featherlou. I know County was a dick. I know most of the time County had nothing of value to contribute, but the reaction to his post(to ban), just doesn’t make sense. Maybe he should have watched his ass a little better, you’re right.
To over-extend your analogy, county’s comment in the linked thread does not strike me as even approximate to “being a jerk”. Even for a poster who has been warned, it does not strike me as indefensibly jerkish. Nor was it made in a jerkish way, for the Pit.
That’s the part that I object to. Even if I had been warned, my internal filter would not go off if I were contemplating posting as county did. Not in the Pit.
And so it strikes me as an over-reaction. Even given his public past history, this does not seem to be an example of a continuing habit of jerkdom.
So it’s good that they don’t have a hard-and-fast definition of “dont’ be a jerk,” yet you complain when they interpret it differently than you? I think Lynn has explained herself fully and adequately, which (IMHO) is something you don’t often see the Mods and Admins of this board do.
D’oh! Took me a minute. Since I’ve got no compunctions about naming names, I’ll say that Brutus, as annoying and petty as he can be, does occasionally (occasionally) add something to a debate. I’ve seen him pull out non-rectal cites on the rare occasion, which is more than I can say for county.
Shodan, fair enough that it doesn’t set off your internal jerkometer; it definitely sets off mine. Telling someone who’s being discriminated against to quit whining, when you agree that they’re being discriminated against, is jerky in my book. “Indefensibly” so? Nah, but that’s not the rule, especially not for someone that’s On Thin Ice.
Bastard shoulda been saying please and thank you in every post. Shoulda kept his ass out of the Pit entirely. Shoulda taken a break from the boards. Any of these things would’ve kept him on the right side of the banstick. Telling people to quit whining was either very stupid or a pathetic cry for banning.
I recently learned that the term “cranky” came from peoples’ experiences with Henry Ford’s Model-T. Each car seemed to have a personality all its own, especially with starting it. As you know, it was started by turning a crank in front. Sometimes it would start first time. Sometimes it required several times. It was fairly unpredictable. So when a person displayed an unpredicatable temperament, he was called “cranky”.
Somehow that etymology just sounded too good to be true. 'Course, it helps that in City of Lost Children, there’s a villain named Krank, and my brother told me it was German for “sick.” I’ve since assumed (semi-incorrectly, it seems) that English “crank” derived from German “sick.”
(It’s a great movie, not least for the character’s names: in addition to Krank, the two other main characters are a little girl named Miette–French for “Crumb”–and an everyman oaf named One–English for “one.”)
I did not say that it was good; I said I understood the rationale. OTOH, here is an instance where I don’t see why county’s post was interpreted as jerkdom. So this “I can’t describe it, but I know it when I see it” notion has its drawbacks.
It is apparently " being a Jerk" if you compare some of the issues encountered by the gay rights movement with the civil rights movements of the 60s. (And, to be fair, to characterize as “whining” the idea that the gay experience is absolutely unique.)
So I can call someone an asshat and a fuckwad and all the rest of it. But I can’t say, “Quit whining - the civil rights movement had many of the same problems.” That is apparently over the line.
Why?
Well, she has given some explanation. Apparently she and TVblen agreed that county’s post stepped over the line. Whether this is "full’ or “adequate” remains under question.
I fail to see why comparing the civil rights movement of the 60s to the gay rights movement of today is so dreadfully offensive. Any number of posters, many of them gay or gay-friendly, have done exactly that, here and in GD. Hell, you can’t post to any gay-marriage thread without that comparison being made sooner or later. So apparently it is enough to tell someone to “stop whining” to get banned, if you have been warned.
As I mentioned, compared to the level of invective I have heard from some of our more hysterical Dopers - especially certain of our gay Dopers - this is so minor as to be laughable. And God knows conservatives such as myself have been told to “stop whining” or “get down off the cross” or whatever more than once when we complain of what appears to be liberal bias.
And yet, oddly enough, county is banned, for saying the same thing - to a gay Doper.
I agree with Shodan on this one. county’s last post in the linked thread, while rude, did not strike me as ban-worthy. It seems wrong to ban someone for behavior which would not get another poster even warned. Alternatively, if county was banned based on his past behavior, why wasn’t he banned before when said behavior occurred?
It’s like putting someone on parole for shoplifting, and then locking him up for parole violation when he fills our his weekly time sheet in blue pen instead of black.
Not, I’d guess, if you’ve been warned you’re on thin ice.
Not, apparently, if you’ve been warned you’re on thin ice.
That is apparently over the line.
Apparently so, if you’ve been warned you’re on thin ice.
He’d been warned he was on thin ice.
Have you been told to do so by folks who were currently under warning?
By the way, your posts implying a liberal ibas to this banning are bizarre, considering how much of a liberal nutcake county usually was. His insane pro-union screeds made me cringe more than once.
Somehow that etymology just sounded too good to be true. 'Course, it helps that in City of Lost Children, there’s a villain named Krank, and my brother told me it was German for “sick.” I’ve since assumed (semi-incorrectly, it seems) that English “crank” derived from German “sick.”