Discussion of Pit rules

OK, folks, here’s a thread to discuss the Pit rules that I just put up, and also discuss rules that I SHOULD put up. I promise to CONSIDER all reasonable requests, though I don’t promise to act on all of them.


Great set of rules. The “lawn chair” thing has been a particular pet peeve of mine.


Might a humbly request a concise definition of ‘hate speech’?

Not that I plan on treading the fine line myself, but it might preempt some future disagreements over what is and what ain’t.

I don’t think that *pulling up a deckchair to watch the fireworks * is such a heinous crime. It can sometimes take the sting out of what might otherwise be just a shit-fight, and may give the players a bit of perspective about the silliness of their arguments! Anyway, when a poster is called into the pit, most people who read the threads are indeed there to see the fireworks, regardless of whatever other ‘legitimate’ reasons they may offer for their presence (IMHO of course). :smiley:

What’s the deal with the “parody of a parody of that other parody” thing?

Granted, I thought a few people overreacted, but it was still a bit annoying.

If I start a parody thread with the proper links and I find that somebody else has already done it, or somebody posts a different one that’s drawing more participation, or I belatedly find out I’m parodying a parody…

Should I post to the thread asking a Mod to close it, e-mail requesting the same, or both?

[sub]This is not a gag. I’m serious.[/sub]

I don’t know, kambuckta. Just because you came in to watch doesn’t mean you have to announce yourself.


What prompted this change suddenly? I mean, this IS the Pit. Obviously, being an indiscriminate asshole is not acceptable, but geez, if you start putting rules on what people say, you might as well call this MPSIMS2. That’s what I thought the Moderators were for, to control and prune the genuine assholes.

I like things the way they are. Obnoxious, heated, funny, and pointed. These parodies come and go, the whole “pulling up chair” thing comes and goes, so why make a big deal about it?

Then again, my opinion truly doesn’t matter, and the fact is I think you’re doing a great job. But still, I wouldn’t mind an explanation, if only for clarification.

But bandwidth is so precious.

I’m with Airman on this one. I’ve always felt the “pulling up chairs” thing was good, because it usually meant the thread in question was silly. What about non-sequiturs in threads like that, such as, "OP: PosterA needs to learn to read. Next post: So, how 'bout them Packers? If you put a stop to one, why not another? And if you stop those, why not hijacks?

P.S. Did you still want Arcanum? I found all the manuals and everything but one disk.

A general list of do’s and don’ts might be good, but a concise definition wouldn’t be. A concise definition would force the authorities to enforce the rules very strictly, rather than leaving some room for interpretation. Best to make such rulings on a case-by-case basis (with a backbone of common sense, of course).

Oops, I hit submit before I was done. I meant, and I’ll find that other disk if you’re interested, since it’s kind of vital to the enjoyment (read: installation) of the game.

OK, end of my hijack.

Two comments:

  1. You need to put a space between “:” and “pulls” so it’s not a smilie anymore. :slight_smile:
  2. I’m sick to shit of the people (and there are a couple well-known high-post count offenders) who frequently come into a thread and post nothing more than:

If they don’t have anything more to say, then it’s pretty obvious they’re just nursing the erection that they get by seeing their name on the Forum list. And really, at that point there’s no point in having them on this Board anymore.

Can you swap the location of these Pit Rule threads. Intuitively, one hits the first thread title one is interested in looking at. It might make more sense to read the rules before the discussion. Have I made a reputation as a nit-picker now?
By the way, no problem with those rules. Former lurkers never SAY they’re just here to watch the show.

Doors and Throatshot:

There have always been rules in the Pit.

Calling another Doper a racial/religious name (nigger, kike, raghead) was an almost certain banning.

Threatening another poster was a guarantee of a banning

Threating to sue the Board was an insta-ban.

I think the rules are just being codified and made a little clearer. The mods have always frowned at the “pull up a lawnchair” posts, racial/religous namecalling and the Ignore list thing is board-wide. So far, the only new one was the “put links in parody threads…or else” one and we all know who started that ruckus.


Oh, fuck my granny in the can with a salad shooter, we have rules now? Can I continue to be offensive and incomprehensible?

Also, not reading posts clearly should result in a spanking from someone: Sorry, Throatshot, I misread your post and thought you were agreeing with the “MPSIMS2” part, not the “The lawnchair thing isn’t that huge of a deal” part.




Re: Rules - I’m not a fan of the pull up lawnchair, but neither do they bother me much. Question - I’ve often done a “sitting here in the liberal but not a fucking lunatic section” thing, which can be construed as the pull up a lawnchair (especially since i"ll offer refreshments…) is that a problem? Generally, it’s actually a response to the OP’s where some one takes a liberal to task for something or other and I’m basically agreeing that they were out of line (which of course rarely happens to us liberals… :wink: )

I’m all in favor of the link requirement for parody threads. And have trusted the mods so far when we’ve ended up with 15 parodies of the same gig (usually several are closed).

and, as Fenris pointed out, the hate speech one has already really been around.

(Fenris, may I offer to be the ‘spanker’ >> :smiley: )

Having done the same thing, on a conservative side, I’d lobby for it to be considered OK. It’s a way of distancing yourself from someone nominally on your side, but with whom you don’t want to be associated. I’m pro-gun. Were Wildest Bill ever allowed back, I’d certainly be saying something like “Gun-enthusiast but not a fucking lunatic” given some of WB’s posts (“I like shooting things while in a moving vehicle” or whatever he said).

I think (IANA mod) the difference between “Get me a chair in the ________ but not a fucking lunatic” section and “Pulling up a lawnchair” is that in the first, you’re taking a stance: publically disagreeing with the poster (albiet in a humorous way) and in the second, you’re just egging things on without getting your hands dirty, if you see what I mean. But IANA mod, so that’s just my 2c

“Pulling up a lawnchair” is just another way of saying “Let’s you and him fight” which has always been a no-no…um…HEY LYNN! I found a Pit-Rule you missed: “Let’s you and him fight” posts are strictly verboten!


well naturally, I see what you mean - since I personally think I’m being damned witty while offering Brie and wine, and not merely spectating. :smiley:

Seriously, I genuinely see it as a different breed of hte species, and worthy of keeping.

(I can send mustard/fudge sauce as potential, um support, yea, that’s the word, for this position… )

Would somebody mind filling me in on where the whole parody-of-a-parody thing started? I haven’t been following it too much because I didn’t follow it from the beginning and by the time I realized that something was going on, it was too complicated for little ol’ me to figure out. Thanks.

Lynn–I think the rules are good. I agree with the above posters, however, that the “pulling up a lawn chair” thing needn’t be a rule. I find it annoying, too, but IMHO, we should keep hard-and-fast rules to a minimum. I like how the governing rule on the board is “don’t be a jerk,” and that the various other rules are clarifications of what it means to me a jerk on the SDMB. I can’t see how a “pulling up a lawn chair” post is really jerky. I think this should be more of a “guideline,” like keeping “me too” posts to a minimum.