Ellis Dee -- suspension lifted

About This Message Board
81

Well, from what I’ve been able to figure out from reading the threads involved is that TubaDiva was upset because the “C” word was used, reacted negatively, and put the suspension in place.

Perhaps I’ve missed something, but I’ve read nothing to change my mind of my (potentially) over-simplification of the issue at hand.

If, indeed the “C” word is considered over the top, or hate speech, or whatever, then fine. But the pit seems to be the place where much is tolerated. Being a moderator should not come into play in the pit unless the cardinal rule of wishing death on someone is broken. “Being a jerk” is a tough thing to define in the pit. Hate speech is even harder to define. If there are certain taboo words that cannot be used, that’s fine. Please list them. But be prepared to listen to EVERYONE, since my definition of hate speech and taboo words are most assuredly different than every other poster here.

It is a dangerous thing to legislate words, but it is the right of the SDMB to do so. But you have to be consistent. And I think that’s all the community is asking for. There is no consistency on the board.

I see the “N” word referenced constantly as an example of hate speech, yet many blacks use the term with each other in everyday speech. Is it ok to call a white person a “Honkey”, “Cracker”, “White Trash”, “Redneck” or whatever the equivalent insult is? You are going to have a long list. TubaDiva may hate the “C” word, but that doesn’t mean everyone does. But if it is the policy of the SMDB to make it a taboo word, by all means get it out there.

I was reading a thread entitled Recommend me a “hard” alcohol (that’s widely available) where Stranger On A Train makes a comment about the Irish

Now, I don’t think **Stranger ** meant to be hateful, but IMO crossed the line. I don’t know Stranger, but I’m guessing a few Irish people might be upset by that stereotype. Especially on this board, where stereotyping is frowned upon, and statements like this would rarely, if ever, stand without someone coming down on them. But there was not one poster or moderator that felt a need to correct **Stranger ** in the thread (at least when I stopped reading the thread).

If a similar statement about blacks, women or jews appeared on the board, the members would come down hard on the poster. So where do we draw the line? Can I say that “blacks are a crazy bunch of watermelon eaters, and they sure do like their welfare checks, but damned if they can’t make some good fried chicken.”? Of course not. At least not with people hammering me, calling me a racist, and so on and so forth. Stereotyping the Irish as a culture of druken thugs is pretty insulting if you ask me. **Stranger ** wasn’t publicly repremanded. And this quote wasn’t even in the pit!

If **Ellis Dee’s ** great sin was to use the “C” word, in the Pit, no less, then I think there needs to be some clarification on what is and isn’t acceptable. You can’t have it both ways. If **TubaDiva ** was Irish and was offended by **Stranger’s ** assessment of her heritage, he should have been banned too. And if she’s looking to be consistent, he should have been banned on the principle of consistency. *Especially * since this comment took place outside the Pit. I don’t care if the comment was meant as a joke in a thread about alcohol. Someone, somewhere out there probably didn’t like it.

Banning is the right of the board and the mods, even if this *is * a pay site.
But you have to be fair.

TBB

82

To be clear, I smirk at the use of the word asshole as some sort of serious insult. The sight of actual assholes simply makes me turn away.

Go ahead, try 'em. When a word is wholly irrelevant, I find it pretty easy to ignore (or mock).

Zest (Peace when he was trolling the SDMB) tried to take some serious shots at me on Fathom. He wound up riling the rest of the posters more than he bothered me. It tends to be a matter of considering the source. Some little street urchin calling strangers filthy names does little but demonstrate his lack of manners and awareness. I tend to see similar epithets from posters in the same way.

(Gullible woud be kind of hard to prove. Unprogressive just means I no longer have my car insurance with them.)

83

My take on it:

The great sin wasn’t the swear word; it was the personal attack on a mod who was just doing her job. There’s a bunch of NFL fans in here; think of it as akin to putting your hands on the ref.

Don’t get hung up on a list of dirty words. The “no personal attacks” rule outside the pit has never been related to cussing at all. I think they just want to extend this rule to cover mods doing their duties, regardless of whether or not you’re in the pit at the time.

Much like the “attack the post, not the poster” idea, attack the ruling, not the mod. Seems simple and reasonable enough, no?

I don’t think they’re looking to extend this to mods posting as a general member, but I’m not touching that with a ten foot pole.

84

Glad to have you back BTW.

I think most of the people agree with your assessment, including those who barked after the punishment, and I agree that quibbling about acceptable words is a pointless excersise.

Still, and this comment is largely directed at Mods, what I’d like a comment on is why a suspension was tossed around here? To me that’s an awfully severe penalty. To steal the NFL metaphor, it feels like a player getting a 4-game suspension for making contact with a ref.

I fear that had a bit of racket been made over the suspension it may have stood on what seems to be pretty small potatoes. On the scale of over reactions to things, Ellis’s cussing over a thread closing is able a 4 out of 10 and a 30-day suspension over that is close to a 7.

85

Sniff. I knew you would be defensive about it.

Welcome back, Ellis Dee. I thought you had about as much chance as the Titans. Oh well. If we could just draft Young from the Longhorns or that kid who is the QB for USC – what’s-his-name…

It seems to me that the suspension system here at the Dope worked okay. Ellis Dee wasn’t suspended for long and probably a few people were reminded that we are not quite at an “anything goes” point even in the Pit.

I used to wonder why the rules weren’t spelled out more and why there wasn’t more consistency. I think it is to allow some latitude for individual cases and to keep the list of rules from looking like the U.S. Tax Code. Yes, it still annoys me sometimes, but it seems to work for the best most of the time.

86

Apparently, no one is.

87

Yes, it does seem to work most of the time. But it doesn’t work all of the time, as this particular case proves. With all of the confusion over this, it seems that many people **DO ** want some clarification.

But hey… if it happens to you, I guess you’ll know what you did. And everyone else will too. And then there won’t be an outcry like there was in this instance.

88

Welcome back Ellis Dee. Glad to see it. I agree with what you said and think it could be fairly easy and reasonable to separate Mods-as-Posters from Mod-Hat-On situations. If they are acting in a professional capacity then they should be addressed in that way. They are doing their job. If you don’t agree with the call, address that issue, not the Moderator.
If they are wallowing in the Pit with the rank and file then they are subject to the general conditions suffered by all.
IMO, YMMV.

To NoClueBoy, Peace. I’m sorry if I was a bit snippy in that one. My apologies.
Nic

89

Well, it’s still being hashed out. There is some question as to where the lines should be for moderator actions.

As with tomndebb, I have no problem with being attacked in my capacity as a poster. I certainly post with no holds barred in that capacity, and I expect the same in return.

90

As I understand it, you cannot now receive the same in return. As a Moderator, you will “win” many debates because many of the members are going to bar holds. Why risk losing a paid membership by calling a prick a prick, an idiot an idiot, or a liar a liar?

91

There’ll be a slight charge each time you do.

92

Oh, and Ellis dee, I don’t think that you did anything wrong. IMO, you certainly did not break any of the de facto rules of The Pit, regardless of what Tubadiva claims. You were made an example of, and unfairly (again MHO).

I would be nobody’s scapegoat, and I sure as hell wouldn’t be anyone’s poster-child for the properly behavior-corrected.

93

I think this is a very good point, and one which needs to be considered before making any absolute rules regarding treatment of moderators. I for one have no interest in being a moderator if it effectively removes my ability to be a poster. I personally don’t care about bad words being directed at me.

That said, some mods and admins do. There have always been limits to how much abuse you could heap on a mod or admin before there were consequences, even in the Pit. I don’t think that’s been a bad thing. Really, I’d like to see us stay away from the extremes in both directions.

94

It seems to me that the obvious answer is just to impose the same restrictions on how much abuse can be heaped on any poster, moderator or not. Would the forum really suffer any if a limit was made on how much abusive language posters could hurl at each other? I’m not saying people shouldn’t be allowed to disagree with each other, but it seems like there’s a lot of room between, “I think you’re wrong” and “I think you’re a cunt.”

There are already some restrictions on what names posters can call each other (e.g., racial slurs) . . . I don’t think extending this to include other offensive words like “cunt” would be that big a deal.

95

How about this: mod-only screen names? I started a new thread to discuss this idea.

96

We pay now. Your decisions are fiduciary; i.e., you depend on public confidence for the value of your site. When I go to a private home, invited for entertainment, I expect to follow whatever rules the host lays down, no matter how stupid I may find them. After all, I can just leave if I don’t like it. But when I go to a public place, where I’ve paid for admission, I don’t expect to be ejected when a staffer has been rude to me and I’ve responded in kind — at least not without a refund. Tuba is still the parochial matron of the site, protecting the staff from any encroachment by the riff-raff known as “members”. It is a role she has long held. What you are sorely lacking now is an advocate for the membership — a voice that makes your site worth the price of admission. You might think it’s a hassle to put up with us, but it’s not always a piece of cake dealing with you either. You (the corporate you) seem to be resting on your laurels that the site is so good that people will come and pay and suffer every manner of abuse just for the privilege of participating. And true, some will. But when that happens, you’ll lose the very diversity of personalities that has always made this site attractive. All you will have left are doormats that don’t even realize that their payment entitles them to decent treatment. Maybe that’s what you want. Who knows.

97

This incident and discussion make me think of how I thought of school teachers and how they seem to be thought of today. I thought of a teacher as a master of their world, with total unquestioned authority. Now swearing at teachers is regulated or must be curtailed.

While playing as a kid in your neighborhood, it used to be that if you hit a baseball through a neighbor’s window that you could legitimately expect the neighbor to chase you down and drag you back to to fix it and drag you home to let your parents spank you for it and make you pay for it. Now, you would be arrested for grabbing that kid, charged with assault and kidnapping, and some parents would just dismiss it with, “Why did you wake me? Kids will be kids.”

No one seems to respect any kind of authority anymore, personal or written. Everyone wants freedom, but not the responsibility that goes along with it. I don’t want to guard my own property so I accept a Police force. I want to have a discussion, not a free-for-all, so I welcome Moderators.

As to this particular incident, the word “cunt” is a personal insult, not a corporate one. I don’t believe you can use the word and mean anything other than an attack on the core beliefs of a person that drove them to an action. From the rules, “You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil. Hate speech, insults, and purposely inflammatory remarks (i.e., trolling) will not be tolerated.” So, personal attacks are not allowed.

If you signed up for the Board and didn’t read the rules, then you are ignorant. If you signed up and want to ignore them then you reap what you sow. If you don’t understand the first rule - “We have one guiding principle: Don’t be a jerk” - then you should ask before signing up.

I think everyone behaved quite humanly, got overheated, calmed down, and made nice.

To the whole issue of “We’re paying now so we have a right to expect more.” Well, I see that a paid member should expect what they paid for, and the Board has should expect what’s been signed-up for. It’s never a one-way street. You want better, you give better. This “I’m entitled” mentality is crap.

98

By limits, I’m not talking about booting anybody who talks back to mods, I’m talking about having a line past which unwarranted abuse of mods/admins is not tolerated. Such a line has always existed here, and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. The only question is where we draw it.

Whether the board is pay to post or not has nothing to do with what I’m talking about. If you go to Disneyland and start screaming obscenities at the employees, you’re going to get booted without a refund, regardless of whether your ticket price pays their salaries. That’s the sort of limit I think we will always need to have.

Beyond that, though, I’m leery of imposing too many more restrictions on how mods and posters talk to/about each other, and for purely selfish reasons: I think it will make being a mod sort of suck. I want to be able to tease and poke at people (especially idiots) and I don’t want people to be afraid to tease and poke at me.

99

Thanks for posting this. I thought that was how the board always ran. As a matter of fact, I don’t recall anyone else ever getting bitched out for cussing at a mod, at least not to the point of getting suspended. For that matter, I don’t really recall anyone getting a warning but I probably missed it if it is, in fact, there.

100

Hear! hear!