It often looks that way to me. (We humans are very prone to getting sucked into the infamous ‘mob mentality.’)
I thought it was worse than that - people would throw rotten fruit, maybe slap the pilloried person? ::checks the Internet:: Hmm, I guess it depends. Here’s a paragraph from Wikipedia:
Those who gathered to watch the punishment typically wanted (and were even encouraged) to make the offender’s experience as unpleasant as possible. In addition to being jeered and mocked, the criminal might be pelted with rotten food, mud, offal, dead animals, and animal excrement. Sometimes people were killed or maimed in the pillory because crowds could get too violent and pelt the offender with stones, bricks and other dangerous objects.[4] However, when Daniel Defoe was sentenced to the pillory in 1703 for seditious libel, he was regarded as a hero by the crowd and was pelted with flowers.[5]
Of course, the pilloried person couldn’t get away. A pittee can ignore the pitting, if they like.
This would be my take on it, and there’s no reason there ought to be any Pit rule against it.
Now, what does it say about a person who hears some legitimate negative feedback and chooses to wallow around in it self-indulgently? It kind of proves the petty self-centricity that was the point of the thread in the first place. But the Pit is where we go when we’re not exactly determined to cover ourselves in glory, and/or we wish to rejoice in the negative attention that we sometimes crave for whatever reason. So it seems like everything is working as intended.
One thing I find ironic about the pit thread in question is how rude people are in their comments to someone they think was being rude. For instance, a typical reply might be (hyperbole for effect), “You’re so f-ing rude you dirty piece of sh*t!” If someone is offended by rudeness, it seems like they should be cognizant of whether or not they themselves are being rude. They should try to exemplify the behavior they wish to see rather than engage in behavior they find offensive.
The pit is very loose about rules and decorum. If the pitee is fighting back in an unconventional way, oh well. That’s the pit. If people want to have a discussion where people respect each other and the method of debate, they should engage in a discussion in a respectful way. If people are insulting the pitee, they don’t really have the justification to be upset if the pitee reacts in a way they don’t like.
Another thing about the thread in question is that many people are bringing up only the most recent issue in the thread. But that thread has been going on for almost 2 years. It’s not just for that recent issue. It’s a never ending pile on where people go to vent their feelings anytime the pitee does something they don’t like. I wish that pit threads didn’t go on forever. I wish they were for just a specific incident. Once that incident is over, then the thread is over. I wish the thread didn’t live on for years and years and thousands of posts where the pitee’s enemies hang out in there like a daily coffee klatch to gripe about the pitee.
That’s the way things used to work around here as you may remember, but the board culture shifted. Now massive omnibus threads are all the rage. I don’t love massive omnibus threads, but the people have spoken with I think a little moderator-nudging here and there. So instead of two old threads getting simultaneously bumped while a third new one is created about some controversial poster who has had a new spasm, it all gets contained to one.
I don’t prefer it, but I get it.
There may be a larger/broader question here.
The SDMB moderators and administrators, IMHO, have a bona fide and inarguable need to quickly access, and/or consolidate and tabulate, a poster’s history – particularly once some sort of infraction has occurred.
I think most of would agree with that. Patterns of behavior matter, in terms of moderation, in about a dozen fairly clear and substantive ways.
Lower on the food chain than the SDMB staff (“Law Enforcement”), I would argue there exists a second rung (“Norms, Customs, and Practices Enforcement”). IMHO, we do that within and amongst ourselves.
Not every issue has to go to the Boss or to HR. Mom and Dad don’t always need to be involved. But a lot of issues still call out for resolution to reduce community friction, enhance community harmony, and to attempt to make it a welcoming place for newbies to join.
So the question, to me, is what value, if any, exists in making a poster’s "history of norms, customs, and practices transgressions readily available to all of us?
Does it do more harm than good, or does it do more good than harm?
Folks reply to new threads without even reading the OP what makes you think they’re going to read a multi-thousand post thread?
The value I see is in response to the all to common ATMB banning thread where we’ll hear;
“But they were so nice in Games and CS threads why were they banned???”
without an omnibus thread,
“Give me a couple of hours and I’ll post links to dozens of examples of their bad behavior.”
with an omnibus thread,
“Here, read the damned thread.”
I’ve tried to tag all of the more recent suspension-banning threads for easier access. They go back as far as 2005, but many might have been missed.
The Kedikat one is a good example of what you’re talking about I believe.
If that was how things worked around here that would also mean that our frequent fliers would each be getting a new pit thread every couple of days. That seems … unhelpful.
I don’t think this one is binary. Reading a few, reading every 100th post, or just seeing that there are thousands of posts can each/all be instructive.
But if that’s the case, then maybe the upset members should learn to deal with it rather than endlessly creating pit threads. Maybe the problem is more with them getting upset rather than the pitee’s behavior. This board has active moderation. If someone is so problematic that they disrupt the board, then they would be suspended or banned. I don’t doubt that some members are rubbed the wrong way by other members, but oh well, that’s life. Anytime there’s a group of 2 or more, someone is going to be unhappy about something the other person is doing. Just because someone has a bunch of pit threads about them doesn’t necessarily mean they are being disruptive. It could just mean that a small set of the members are rubbed the wrong way and are pitting them a lot. If someone is pitted for 10+ years and thousands of posts yet they are not banned, then it’s clear that the management doesn’t find their behavior as that problematic. If someone continues to get upset at another member, they can deal with it themselves by ignoring that member. They don’t need to create pit threads so they can unleash unlimited derogatory and hurtful rants at the pitee.
The mods have access to every warning and mod note a poster has ever accumulated. I don’t know if they have access to every complaint that’s ever been made about a poster, but quick access to a poster’s history isn’t a problem.
Then why should we have mods? Why don’t we just call for a vote of no confidence every time a poster does something that someone doesn’t like?
I spent two weeks at a Buddhist Monastery.
There, I learned that – let’s say Thursday evenings – the Monastics (Monks, Nuns) congregated to have a bitch session.
I was a bit surprised.
“Oh, yeah. We have our issues just like everybody else does. Where our practice comes in is in trying to resolve them as calmly, fairly, and respectfully as possible.”
Is that The Pit? IMHO, it can be, but isn’t required to be. It can be Queensberry Rules or it can be UFC. It can also, obviously, be anything in between.
I respect those who abstain entirely. It’s what works for them. I respect those who arrive there ready for mutual combat.
I don’t see as much of what I’d call “bullying” or “piling on” as some others might. If we used Polls in the pit, either rather than, or along with, posting, we might garner more useful information about how widespread a reaction to a poster or an action is.
And maybe that’s useful, particularly if it were anonymous at the user level.
But sometimes a Pit thread drags on … because of recidivism. And sometimes, it’s because of a widespread negative reaction toward an action, a poster, or the combination.
And sometimes, it’s a vigorous debate about whether or not something or somebody IS okay or not.
The rest of my post addresses that.
And sometimes it goes on because pitters are enjoying themselves.
If and when that’s what I called “mutual combat,” then … consenting adults.
I abhor bullying, piling on, and the torch and pitchfork crowd. I don’t see that as a rampant problem here.
“People are wonderful. I love individuals. I hate groups of people. I hate a group of people with a ‘common purpose’. 'Cause pretty soon they have little hats. And armbands. And fight songs. And a list of people they’re going to visit at 3am. So, I dislike and despise groups of people but I love individuals. Every person you look at; you can see the universe in their eyes, if you’re really looking.”
–George Carlin
Quickly (I have to run)…
We’re not a Democracy at SDMB. We’re a Constitutional Republic/Representative Democracy, and for good reason.
Americans have armed forces, the FBI, the CIA, 16 other intel agencies. We have State Police, local police, Sheriffs, highway patrol, building departments, code enforcement, HOAs, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Each serves a role with clear/fuzzy demarcation.
And at the bottom? It’s people … trying their best to get along and work it out.
This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of the whole purpose of the Pit. It’s to avoid the exact scenario you are describing here. It’s an outlet for frustration for people, a place to vent about things in general but also other posters.
Sometimes people upset others but not to the extent of being worthy of moderation. I say “sometimes”; it’s actually “the vast majority of the time”. On a lot of message boards, you just have to swallow your ire, because you have to be civil. Here, that’s the case for most of the board, but we do have one place as an outlet.
This is also ignoring the fact that we have people that are good at skirting the edge of being worthy of being modded, and do it on purpose. It gives us a place to gripe.
And you can “deal with it” by ignoring the Pit if you don’t like it.
For me, I’m offended by the Pit because it’s a place that people frequently use for personal insults that are deliberately hurtful. I have no problem with having a place to hash out disagreements. If it was an environment similar to the monks and nuns hashing out problems, it’d be great. But that’s not what happens. Pit threads seems more about people who are unleashing a bunch of derogatory insults rather than trying to earnestly hash out a disagreement. Even for the pitee mentioned in OP, if you think she is the only person who is rude or snarky on this board, you haven’t been reading enough threads.
As for ignoring it, imagine there was a forum called “1A” where anything goes. You could say anything you wanted about other members, including bigotry, racism, hate speech, sexual fantasies, whatever. I’d imagine that you’d be offended by the existence of that forum because of the hateful and hurtful nature of the content. You wouldn’t want to just ignore the forum. You’d want that content to not exist. Although that would be more extreme than the pit, it’s somewhat similar to why I don’t like pit threads. The person being pitted is a real person with real feelings and is likely hurt by the comments. I don’t think people should do that, especially for the relatively minor transgressions that go on this board. I don’t really understand why people are able to hurt people that way. I can certainly understand feeling that way, but I don’t understand why someone would say so many hurtful things directly to someone. Especially considering the membership of this board. I get the impression that many of the people here are unusual and non-conforming in many ways. I would guess that they have been the recipient of negative comments because of some of the ways they don’t fit it, and I would guess that they were hurt by those comments. I would hope that they would remember how hurt they felt by those comments and wouldn’t want to inflict that kind of hurt on others. It’s totally fine to have a disagreement with someone else, but I wish that people would express that disagreement in a productive and respectful way without being insulting and hurtful. If you’re participating in a pit thread, try to think about if the gist of your post is to hurt the other person or if it’s to try to actually address an issue in a way that improves the situation.
The Pit can be crude, but it isn’t always. And it’s informative when it is. I won’t name names, but there are posters who I don’t respect because rather than making the case for their opinion, they go straight to empty trash talk. I appreciate seeing people’s true colors, thanks to the Pit.
Also, people who get pitted tend to be quite good at defending themselves. People have been known to joke that it’s an honor to be pitted, and sometimes there’s a speck of truth to that. There are a few people on this board (again, no names) who sometimes espouse noxious views or exhibit truly exasperating behavior, but it’s pretty clear they have significant distress or deficiencies in their lives, to the point where they can’t really be held responsible for their stupidity. I don’t see those folks being pitted.
When a pitting is completely unfair, it either gains no traction or turns out badly for the OP, who ends up on the receiving end of the derision they ill-advisedly tried to heap on someone else. Again, a chance to see people’s true colors.
LOL. That is so not true.