When someone is Pitted, it’s basically them against the entire population of the board who may seek to pile on. It’s Miller’s stated position that they should be allowed to defend themselves in any way they see fit, subject only to broader board rules that apply even in the Pit – no racism, no threatening harm, no threatening legal action, etc. As long as they’re within those rules I see no problem.
Other posters have either ignored their Pit thread or gone to great lengths to engage in arguments to defend themselves. In one recent case, those arguments resulted in renewed pile-ons, and a poster whose politics I strongly disagreed with but who I thought was otherwise a valuable poster was driven off the board entirely, which I think was a loss to the board. I applaud Beck for taking a creative approach to being virtually pilloried.
The kind where Beck apologized in the relevant thread for a well-intentioned criticism that had been misinterpreted. That should have ended the issue. Instead, your somewhat inexplicable sarcastic post that rebooted the Pit thread brought on a pile-on that was then further driven by incorrect perceptions of what had actually happened.
This is kind of amusing. My comment about Beck elicited a couple posts and an apology by Beck. No pile on, nothing else. Then another poster revived the thread 3 weeks later for some reason, and everyone was commenting on that poster, with nothing about Beck. Until you came in to relitigate the issue from 3 weeks previous, which was what restarted this mess.
Yes. Dont we applaud people who fight back against bullies? I congratulate Beck for doing so. isnt bullying something we should abhor?
So are personal insults- in fact you can get banned for using them. Except in the Pit.
Okay, let us compromise- no more Pitting of posters- such threads are kinda rare anyway. I mean, the attacks on public figures, raging against the machine etc are 20 times more common. And also ban the use of Becks tactics. Fair? But as long as we allow such bullying, I cant see why we would disallow a defense used against the bullies.
Obviously, that is not my actual position here. My position is that Beck had a perfect right to do what she did (but ONLY in the Pit) a position that agrees with what Miller and the other Mods have stated/ In other words, I agree with the current state of affairs and the Mod’s ruling. If you want to change rules , then okay fine, I suggest another rule change. But I’d prefer just the status quo.
I know, Beck outsmarted the bullies and ruined their fun. Good on her.
A bunch of people attacking someone personally is bullying, especially when they say she isnt allowed to fight back. That is kinda cowardly, isnt it? Shut up and take our insults!
It was Beck, insulting a new poster, in ATMB no less.
She fought back by acknowledging that her behavior was bullying and apologized and then, very shortly thereafter, we all continued to pile on for hundreds of posts the thread went dormant.
Her supporters revived the thread and are now justifying what Beck herself said was unjustifiable.
(And this lead to one of her supporters admitting that they bump threads solely for the purpose of driving threads they do not like “out of view”.)
That is the new idea here suggested by several posters. “We dont like you fighting back against our bullying, it ruins our fun, so we want a new rule to prevent it.”
IIUC, bullying is against the rules. Have you reported these threads? Also, since you stated before that you don’t read Pit threads, how do you know about these threads?
Come on, no need to accuse me of hallucinating. It happened as I described. The discussion of Beck had ended and people were arguing with chela. You then responded to a message from 3 weeks earlier, which is what reopened any Beck commentary.
It’s fine, you probably didn’t notice you were responding to a 3 week old message. No big deal. But don’t accuse others of piling on when it had died out and then restarted with your contribution.