Are you reading Shodan’s odd posts and ignoring mine? I have not warned anyone on the issue. I did not even rebuke anyone or even address the author of this issue on the point. I certainly have not mentioned his behavior to any other staff member or suggested to anyone that any official action should be taken as the result of his posts.
He submitted a series of posts using deliberately taunting language to get a rise out of posters who supported President Obama. This is the Pit; he is welcome to do so. That does not make his posting less an action of trolling, it just means that in this thread, that was the course he pursued. And, as I have noted more than once, an act of trolling is not the same as being a troll, (unless one is the sort who declares that a child who fibbed about the crayon picture on the wall at age two should henceforth and forever be known as a liar–a position I have explicitly rejected). One part of his trolling was a repeated use of the name Hussein. He is, again, welcome to employ it how he wishes. When a poster who had not caught on to what he was doing asked “Why?” the answer was “trolling,” but that does not mean that he should suffer any repercussions for that act as long as it does not become the salient action for which he is known on the SDMB.
If he wandered through Great Debates or General Questions, employing “Hussein” at every opportunity in a manner that made it clear that he was tryng to get a rise out of other posters, he might garner some official notice, but an occasional use, even there, would not bring down wrath on his head.
Where did you get this question? Who has been subjected to any disciplinary action for employing “Hussein”? (I know one childish poster who will now begin to employ it resolutely, but as you note, he will simply mark himself as childish, to the extent that he is not already perceived so).
The issue at hand here is that House Republicans smiled and coozed over Obama, even asking him for his autograph, right before giving him the shaft on the Stimulus vote.
Or was it that California is about to go belly-up?
No, maybe it’s whether President Obama is being irresponsible for taking days off and using Marine One and Air Force One.
No, that’s not it. I think it’s about the traitorous assholes who took President Obama’s picture down from an Air Force Commissary.
Or, god, I’M SO FUCKING CONFUSED! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT??
What I was talking about in the comment you quoted was tomndebb’s having used my supposed meanness to him in the past to justify his not recanting and apologizing for assertions he made with regard to my posting history regarding Barack Obama, assertions which weren’t mere misunderstandings but made up out of whole cloth in the dim recesses of his alleged mind.
In short, it was a comment made within the context of the discussion between tomndebb and me had nothing to do with congressional Republicans or any of the other things you mentioned.
It’s been asked before - notably in posts #127 and #139 of this thread.
Well, since you have clearly (or not so clearly) identified that use as “simple trolling”, then either [ol][li]“simple trolling” is acceptable (as long as it is part of a pattern of trolling, and is done repeatedly within a single thread but not habitually, or if it’s me), or []this is a thinly veiled threat to Stephe96, or, most likely of all[]there’s glory for you.[/ol][/li]Regards,
Shodan
Well, since you have clearly (or not so clearly) identified that use as “simple trolling”, then either [list=1][li]“simple trolling” is acceptable (as long as it is part of a pattern of trolling, and is done repeatedly within a single thread but not habitually, or if it’s me), or this is a thinly veiled threat to Stephe96, …[/li][/QUOTE]
Y’know, when I was a mod, there were any number of posters that I personally believed were trolls, yet I also moderatorially believed that there was insufficient evidence to take official action. That’s not a contradiction.
It’s been asked before - notably in posts #127 and #139 of this thread.
Well, since you have clearly (or not so clearly) identified that use as “simple trolling”, then either [ol][li]“simple trolling” is acceptable (as long as it is part of a pattern of trolling, and is done repeatedly within a single thread but not habitually, or if it’s me), or []this is a thinly veiled threat to Stephe96, or, most likely of all[]there’s glory for you.[/ol][/li][/QUOTE]
Three swings and all misses.
You left out the most obvious probable case: his actions were simply not sufficiently serious to warrant Mod action. Just as it is extremely rare to find a location where one will be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit by fewer than five miles per hour, even though, technically, exceeding the speed limit by even one mile per hour violates the law, the trolling in which he engaged in the first page or so of this thread, (much as minor cases of threadshitting in which you and your corresponding lefty mates engage in GD), is simply too minor an irritant to justify slamming with a hammer.
I think what he’s saying is that a little nose-tweaking is okay, and in the Pit, a little calling out a nose tweaker as “trolling” is allowed, even for moderators who happen to be posting as private citizens. As always, of course, serious accusations of trollery are best handled behind the scenes through the “Report Post” icon.
Of course, this kind of mindless, knee-jerk response, in which you post to a thread something merely to irritate, is characteristic of a certain, rather low and not terribly entertaining form of drivel.
