My guess is it has something to do with (link):
There was a fiasco and I was not informed?
So, some of you seem to be saying that mods need to specify that they are posting in an official “Moderator” capacity, or else they’re just normal posters. I can see your point, except every time a mod posts, his title remains “Moderator,” and if you don’t think that affects how their posts are regarded, I would suggest you are mistaken. In other words, if you’re going to carry the title of “Moderator,” I think you should make an attempt to maintain a higher standard than your average poster.
IN every instance I can recall in which Moderators were speaking specifically as Moderators, they’ve made it clear enough for anyone reasonably described as a moron to understand that they’re speaking as Moderators, and correcting somone or something that’s usually contrary to Board rules and policies.
Frank’s comment about Dave doesn’t seem to fall into the category of a Moderator calling someone on one of the Board rules; just an opinion of one poster on one side of a debate about another poster on the other side of the debate, taking place in The Pit.
I think it’s funny that you posted this in five posts under a post calling Frank a dick and an idiot, in a thread whose OP includes the suggestion that he masturbates to transvestite goat porn. Truly, we have entered a new age of repression.
While there was a discussion in ATMB about setting limits on how abusive you could be toward a moderator in disagreeing with his/her moderating decisions, I know of no rule prohibiting the insulting of moderators.
This is it. And, as he has done, weirddave is free to offer his opinion of me as a poster.
By the way, gooftroopag nailed the immediate stimulus. I should have linked to that in my first response.
Yeah, but had I not been encumbered by that rule, you don’t even want to imagine what I would have said about him. 
I guess I’m still not entirely clear on what the rule is. Ellis Dee was suspended and reinstated; was that because his suspension was incorrect (i.e., he’s free to call mods “cunts”) or are there more subtleties that I’m missing here? I’m not trying to argue against the rule as davenportavenger is; I’d really like a clarification.
I don’t know that we ended up with a general rule from the situation. If you fly off the handle and start screaming insults at a moderator for closing your thread, it’s possible to go too far and get in trouble. Does this mean everyone who disagrees with a moderator decision in the Pit has to craft Miss Manners-like posts of courtesy and obsequiousness? No. Does this mean we have a well-defined, objective definition of how much verbal abuse is going too far? No. (Or if we do, no one showed it to me.)
In my opinion, this is one of those areas where any attempt to make a perfectly consistent, black and white rule (e.g. “no insulting the moderators ever”, “call moderators whatever you want for any reason”, etc.) is a lot worse than simply living with a little bit of grey.
You cunt
be serious?
I have to go with Weirddave on this one, though I’d rather not.
I think he’sabsolutely correct. If I go into a restaurant, I don’t expect to be insulted by the help. Since I am the customer, I expect to be treated politely.
This same holds doubly true when we are talking about someone in a position with authority. There is simply no way around the fact that a moderator has that title under their name all the time, and it is incumbent upon them to act appropriately and reasonably so that they will be an example and so that their judgement will be accepted.
Primarily that is what being a moderator should be about, using good judgement. Gratuitously insulting posters is simply poor judgement. That poster, and friends of that poster are going to (rightfully, imo) be suspicious if that moderator later has to discipline them. It is also inherently such poor judgement (they should understand this without having it be explained to them,) that it truly does call into question their judgement at other times.
It would be difficult to expect Dave to accept moderation on a controversial call from Frank because he’s demonstrated strong prejudice against Dave. Frank has, in effect cancelled his ability to moderate effectively where Dave is concerned.
Poor judgement. Bad customer service. Unnecessary. Unprofessional.
Time to set up the Pit with Instant Replay, I guess.
I was gonna write what Scylla already wrote. So I’ll just second it.
And it’s news to me that weirddave is “bitter, bilious, vile, and vicious.” Hey Dave, how come you’ve never uncloaked around me? You’ve always been helpful and polite… sheesh, how come I never see the good stuff?
While I have no dog in this fight, I have to disagree your analogy. It seems to be more like going into a restaurant and being insulted by somebody who works there but is currently off duty and out of uniform. Nowhere did the post in question imply that it was an “official (as a mod)” post.
If it wasn’t in the pit, I’d say the poster in question should be reprimanded and/or suspended. Considering some of the things said in here though, I don’t see a problem with the content.
Peace - DESK
Proponents of the American System (including TX)?
Opponents of the Death Penalty: Who, prior to last week, had hung their hopes on Roger Keith Coleman’s DNA not matching? (So they could point to a wrongful execution).
I’ll take ‘wrong thread’ for $1000, Alex
I know. I’m a psychic plagiarist.
Shit. I messed up the coding.
Ukelele Ike! Get your worthless scrawny icompetant ass in here in fix that for me, you useless fuck.
Thanks.
Our very own “don’t ask, don’t tell off” policy. Coo-ol.
Wow! Ukelele Ike sure has a signature that looks a lot like Giraffes.
Master Scylla, I fixed your coding for you, sir. I apologize for taking so long. Is there anything else I can do to make your message board experience excellent?
:: backs away bowing ::
Frank’s a tool and won’t last long as a mod. Everyone knows it.