Jesus Christ! I appreciate Lynn Bandoni’s *clarification * of the rule but are you people fucking blind!
**
Ok, I know that we might have a reading comprehension problem here, but I’ll work with everybody.
“I am a really intelligent smartass, too; and 'm sure my researching skills are better than his.” - JOKE
“Pitting Cecil Adams - the putz!” NOT A FUCKING JOKE!
It was the “researching skill” bit that was the joke.
If that were not enough, and I know how much trouble it must be to actually read the thread:
Hmm…, I guess I can see the ambiguity there…
I mean GODDAMMIT!
Preemptive fuck you to WorldEater, Mr. B and maybe even Desmostylus for good measure.
You seem a tad bitter, don’t get so worked up about. Sometimes I wonder what it’d be like to be suspended, banned, or even pitted. Sure, it would suck, but there’d be that certain little joy that you really ticked someone off, and in the case of the former two, you ticked a MOD off.
But I do agree (and I thought so at the time, too), that was probably a bad call on Lynn’s part.
My guess is that the week’s suspension is up, but the tag under the name didn’t get changed back. They seem to be independent of each other, as “custom” tags have been done before.
Ilsa, your comment in the second post about it being a joke seemed to indicate to most people that - your other quote aside - the whole OP was one. I can’t see any way that someone was supposed to connect that sentence to his ability (or lack thereof) to research topics, or that you weren’t, in fact, claiming you could research better than he can. The Comments forum is constantly filled with challenges to his research.
People would jokingly “pit” Cecil constantly in the past, being very stern about the whole thing, in an attempt to get him to post in their thread. This seemed pretty clearly to me, and to many other people, to be the exact same kind of thread.
That in mind, coming out with both barrels blazing because you were unclear in your posting isn’t the best way to defend your actions.
For this to be the case, the suspension maintenance would need to be automatic - i.e., when a person’s week or whatever was up, he/she could immediately post, needing no intervention by a moderator/admin. Maybe that’s the case here.
Yeah, I was thinking something like that - like a “ban for 1 day/1 week/1 month/1 year/forever” selection option. Either that or it’s done manually and whoever let him post again just forgot to remove the “Suspended” tag.
As regards your suspension, far be it from me to question the august will of She Who Must Appeased With Chocolate and Cringing Flattery, but, as my wife often says to me, “That seemed a little premature.”
Anyway, welcome back. At least we know you are serious about this thread.
Is Ilsa still suspended, or has he paid his debt to society?
I’m glad to see that the “no joke thread” thing has been codified. But even judged against those standards, even in hindsight, Ilsa’s suspension was a stretch, IMHO.
So why does it still say “suspended” under his name?
