Disingenuous assertions by Tuba re status restoration

No, I’m not – he’s alleging something that happened six months ago. NOW he wants something done?

He didn’t resubscribe until a couple of months after his Charter Membership expired, even.

Can you show me where that happened? Because that’s not how I remember the situation in May when Charter Memberships were expiring, not at all.

(Doesn’t mean I couldn’t be wrong – I been wrong before and will doubtless be wrong again – but I don’t believe that’s how things went down.)

It is incumbent upon everyone who subscribes to the Straight Dope to keep an eye on when that subscription expires. There was a lot of traffic on the board about this issue at resubscription time and people were sent emails in advance of their subscription expiring. (Not a lot of advance, I do admit – but notices were sent.)

And no, I’m not authorized by management to change a user title like that .

:eek:
I cannot believe the stones on some people around here. a couple of months? Not exactly a missed it by that much issue. The OP missed the charter renewal by a country mile.

This has to be the whinest OP I have read in a long, long time.
Would you like some cheese with that whine?

Sorry, I didn’t realize all the particulars. I thought maybe there was some odd circumstance that made his Charter Member status only go out around now.

I also wouldn’t take it too personally. I think it’s more of a frustration post than anything. A slight misunderstanding of someone’s verbiage seems a lot bigger when you are frustrated at losing something you hold dear.

Aw, I always hate it when people are unhappy and I can’t do anything to make it better.

Yeah, we need a German word for that.

Some notices may have been sent. I didn’t get one (and my e-mail address was and still is correct); judging from comments from other ex-Charter members I’m not the only one that didn’t get a notice. Note that I’m not asking for reinstatement, just pointing out that not everyone got notices.

First, I must say I’m always amused when “the wingers” feel so outraged by a post they consider to be trivial and petty that they feel it necessary to spend the time and effort to submit a trivial and petty post complaining about it. Always good for a laugh…

Second, what part of “Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status” is so confusing to so many of you? All the posts mocking me for trying to get my status restored at this late date are considerably more than a little pretty and absurd given the actual words of my OP.

The point of my OP is that the word “cannot” means that there is no way that something can be done. On its own, as Tuba repeatedly used it in this context, I can see no genuinely honest way it can be asserted to mean that something is against policy. If it is against policy, say that, not that it “cannot” be done. My point that using that word in place of an honest declaration is disingenuous stands. I’ve seen no hint of any intellectually honest rebuttal to that observation.

And TubaDiva is not the only person who misuses that word, which really is a disingenuous cop-out when used in that manner. It’s been abused by plenty of others as an evasion to conceal the fact that someone can indeed do something but simply chooses not to do it (for whatever reason).

Here are just two among many examples from real life:

(1): A slimy company named Trilegiant tricked me (and a million or so other people) into a “free” membership in something that turned out not to be free at all. When I discovered I had been conned, I finally got through to the company (after 25-30 attempts) and demanded a refund. They replied that they “cannot” do what I asked. It was just as disingenuous for them as it is for Tuba. When I contacted the Attorney General and they contacted Trilegiant, it turned out that they could, in fact, do it after all and then did so.

(2): A credit card company wrote me that they were going to jack up my interest rate to effectively usurious levels at a date that corresponded with my normal payment date unless I chose to close the account. But then they messed around with the payment date such that I missed the magic date by one day. When I called them and asked them to close the account and leave the old interest rate in force, they sent me up and up the chain of command whereupon the high-ranking person emphatically insisted: “I cannot do that for you, sir”. When I contacted the Attorney General and they contacted the company in question, it turned out that they could, in fact, do it after all and then did so.

Lesson? People should not use the word “cannot” when in reality it could indeed be done. If something is against policy, be honest enough to say so and do not hide behind that disingenuous evasion of claiming it “cannot” be done.

Here is just a small sampling of the background of this issue showing that I am far from alone in criticizing this disingenuous choice of words:

And here’s more proof that few critics here bothered to read the OP with care, such that not even TubaDiva bothered to read it with any care:

:: sigh ::

What part of “Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status” is so confusing to you, Tuba? Surely I have a right to expect you to read OPs more carefully, especially before being chastised by a senior authority for requesting something I actually had not requested, don’t I?

:: sigh ::

A request was made by Jerry (or whatever tech person was involved) that we didn’t bother him with complaints about title changes because he was much too busy dealing with all the technical problems. He asked that we just wait it out and see if it fixes itself.

I was also waiting for Dex or whoever to publicly issue a decision. To the best of my knowledge (and I was watching for some time) that never happened.

As a result, I felt it was incumbent on me to substantiate my bona fides as a charter member, but my entire history since 1999 showed me to be a “guest” (as one would expect given how this software works), so I had to turn to external documentation. I discovered that nothing on my current hard disks or (apparently) in the Internet archives documented my status, so I was forced to spend a great deal of additional time trying to find such, which I eventually did. That was when I requested that just my title be restored, since I didn’t care much about the lower price. I considered that a valid compromise.

And that was when you told me that you “cannot” do anything about it; that it was utterly beyond even your capabilities. After hearing that, can you blame me for thinking that nothing could be done at all? When I tried all that time later to purchase a regular membership, I did so on a lark. Since you told me that there was nothing that could be done, I was quite surprised to learn that that wasn’t entirely true and that by paying for a membership at least restored my join date.

Look, we paid you for a service; to deny any responsibility on the part of the SDMB whatsoever would make you a truly execrable service provider, and I certainly don’t believe you deserve such criticism – except if you try to deny all responsibility.

I am almost always ridiculously overburdened with responsibilities already, what with caring for two seriously ill parents and all the other heavy responsibilities I must bear. Is it really so much to ask that my service providers work with me and offer some reasonable flexibility when I fail to keep track of all my 38,172 (RaftPeople’s estimate) responsibilities? Not one other of my service provider’s rules are as draconian as that!

And as many have pointed out, many of us did not receive the renewal email. Pointing out that there are other alternatives, especially after the fact (as has been overwhelmingly the case) is simply not good enough.

Why? Because with all of my responsibilities, I can almost never afford to take the time to browse around and visit ATMB or even the header of each forum during renewal season (although I only now know I can renew at any time). All I usually ever have time for is reading and responding to threads in which I’ve made comments. To do that, I go directly to search for my username to see where I am due to issue replies. That being the case, I would not see forum headers or visit ATMB. Going out of my way to check these locations should not be a hard and fast requirement to maintain a membership; the SDMB should bear much more responsibility than that.

But again, my purpose here is simply to point out that using the word “cannot” is disingenuous.

There! Was that really so hard to say in place of “cannot” do it? Sheesh!

“the actual words” are not necessarily the truth. Perhaps they simply do not believe your words, protestations to the contrary or not.

Using cannot in this way is pretty standard English, I don’t see what the problem is.

I’ve just read post #27, above. Surely the problem here is that ambushed just hasn’t provided enough background detail and citations to back up his case. If only people would bother to assemble some evidence before arguing their case.

Okay, okay, I apologise for the sarcasm but… seriously… Let It Go. This level of attention to a point that is over and done with just isn’t healthy. Look, understand the message as either ‘cannot for technical reasons’ or ‘cannot for policy reasons’, but either way it’s not going to change. Life is rich and wonderful, go and start appreciating and enjoying some of it.

From www.dictionary.com:

Sorry, ambushed, but your definition seems to be only number 6.

I am sorry that no one got back to you, it was some time ago and I dont remember the details. I do know that the decision was that we could not do it. I don’t recollect whether “could not” meant that we did not have the power, or knowledge, or means, or right, or permission.

Holy crap. There’s a big internet out there. Go have some fun.

[quote=“ambushed, post:27, topic:520708”]

So…you have 37,172 “responsibilities”, but you had “a great deal of time” to comb through…something…to find proof of…something else? Hmmm…

Yes.

Because while you only have 38,172 specific responsibilities, they have, let’s say 800 members with 38,172 responsibilities each. Some might even have 38,174! :eek: !

Also…key point here: You’re not a unique snowflake who’s is the only person EVER who’s had/has responsibilities and they’re not your goddamned nanny.

How do you make comments if you don’t browse the threads? How do you manage to find threads to leave your droppings of wisdom in in the first place? Clearly some browsing is going on.

Also: time management tip here: You might have more time to read the board if you didn’t spend “a great deal of time” looking for proof of…something and harassing the District Attorney while you try to file nuisance lawsuits…

Did I mention rule #1: The SDMB is not your nanny? At least when I registered, there was a part that mentioned that you WERE required to check ATMB once in a while. And even if it’s not still in the registration agreement, it’s takes a few seconds to check. And I’m pretty sure they put “renewal time” stickies in all forums.

Oh…and did I mention that the SDMB isn’t your nanny? It won’t wipe your nose when you sneeze and it won’t wipe your ass when you poo.

I think Chicago Reader’s (yeah, I know, but I don’t remember who owns the SDMB this week) current policy is stupid–they could make a boodle (a boodle= ~350/500 member who’d cough up $15.00/year to get moved to a new user group that had a charter member title , not see ads and nothing else.) It would be about 12 seconds work on Jerry’s part. But your posts are getting me to the point where I’m wanting to reflexively side with them and have your title changed to “Whiner” or something.

Finally, what part of “cannot can mean procedurally as well as technically” don’t you get? If an underage kid tries to buy booze, despite it being against the law, the clerk is 100% accurate in saying “I cannot sell you booze (because the law doesn’t permit me to)”. It’s certainly technically possible for him to sell to the kid–kid hands him money, clerk hands him booze. But “cannot” is still accurate. So, really. Get over it.

So because TubaDiva chooses to employ disingenuous and evasive language, I’m being openly called a liar and the personal abuse against me is amped up beyond anything I’ve ever seen outside the pit.

I thought there were rules here. This how you run your shop, Tuba? Let the dogs run loose to ignore the rules because your pride was pinged a bit?

And the rest of you: Such fair-minded, sober, clear-thinking comments. Proud of yourselves, are you?

I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but yes. Even with 38,987.3 responsibilities, I found time to post a perfectly legal/legit post in ATMB which should, if you can squeeze time to read it into your 38,432 reponsibilties should give you some guidance as to how to deal with things…including your previous post.

In response to this

There are. But because you don’t read ATMB, you don’t apparently know what they are. Sarcasm is just fine here.

Remember rule #1: The SDMB is not your nanny. Running to the mods because people are disagreeing with (and laughing at) your silly, whiny, over-the-top hysterical posts is akin to asking the SDMB to wipe your butt after you make poopies.

And you still haven’t responded to all the people who’ve pointed out that “cannot” can mean that you can’t do something because of procedures/standards/laws/rule.

So you choose the word “can” rather than “cannot” to cite the definition and assert that that’s somehow close enough. Here are usage examples (from: here):

Oh grow up. I explained all that. Jerry asked us not to bother him or TPTB and to just wait and see if it fixed itself. And my request to restore the title was roughly 6 months ago. This OP was clearly not an attempt to revisit that decision, as any careful and intellectually honest reading of my OP would reveal. My OP was a complaint about evasive and disingenuous language, that’s all.

[quote=“Fenris, post:33, topic:520708”]

“Cannot” is not now and never was “accurate” in this context, and your insulting load of calumnies and abusive mockery crossed lines that should not be crossed by someone with any self-respect.

If you had a valid objection, you would have made it far less abusively. It is clear you had no valid objection, since you decided to substitute extremely insulting mockery in lieu of such a point.

And I’ll pass along your “fuck you” to my dying parents in extreme pain. That should cheer them up.

Same cite as mentioned in post #36:

Usage:

TubaDiva cannot change titles back to Charter Member because she is not permitted to.

Admins cannot change titles back to Charter Member because they are forbidden to do so.