JokePepper isn’t a sock.
He’s a truly well meaning dork who is angry with me 
My browser must have its “degree verification” settings disabled… damn custom internet settings! 
Well, I asked. Thanks.
I wonder if Marge is gonna register next to pee on us?
Thank You
Wow, that’s a blast from the past!
I have been refraining from posting in this thread because I really didn’t want to bring that episode up. I think that when Notthemama changed to Duck Duck Goose she significantly changed her posting style, and was generally, well, just ducky.
Then I said to her: “Shaddup, you sanctimonious know-it-all!” Since her name change, and until recently, I haven’t been inclined to repeat my remarks to her new incarnation.
Personally, I like her in her mode as Google Queen. She usually imparts accurate and relevant information (though, like all of us, no matter how well versed we are in a field, she ocassionally screws up). The links and quotes she provides are a service in the cause of fighting ignorance.
That being said, I sometimes have a problem with her tone when she’s supplying Google cites, and very often have a problem with her tone when she’s discussing board policy. Her posts are frequently in the tone of God, pronouncing from on high: “Google has THE ANSWER” or “board policy is THIS.” The Google citations are useful as a starting point or cross-reference, but where the board, particularly GQ, is valuable is when people with knowledge in on a subject can add their particularized thoughts and experiences.
When a person has actual expertise in an area it’s fine to state things authoritatively. However, when that person is merely linking to information that he or she found on sources that he or she cannot affirm or discredit, the speaker should not come off like he or she is giving an authenticated answer. Rather, the speaker should make clear that he or she is just passing along links without vouching for them.
Likewise, when a person has no authority to speak for the board administration, he or she should not make pronouncements on board policy. It’s fine to set out what “I’ve observed,” or “The Mods have said” or the like. But if you’re not a mod or admin, don’t talk like one.
That being said, I think Duck Duck Goose has been getting a little crabby lately. I think she overreacted in the Unban Satan thread, and in this thread she went totally over the top. I wonder if it wouldn’t do her good to take a bit of a board vacation for several weeks. I know that I’ve done that when I’ve gotten overwhelmed, and it’s been good for me.
Good luck.
How about some www.stickfight.com instead? Actually a VERY cool game…
what, 7 and a half pages weren’t enough for either of you?
wring–who are you referring to?
Green Bean : You and hardy.
you step in here after 7 and a half pages w/your sentiments, (fine, everybody gets to say what they feel) and hardy quotes your entire post and bolds out “THANKS” as if nobody else had said they find the googling lame? we’ve had damn near 8 pages of (mostly) that.
x number of people find it annoying.
y number find it helpful.
nope, wait, it’s now x plus one
christ.
have you even noticed that the object of your scorn hasn’t even posted in this thread in quite a while?
Ya know what? not everybody here likes everybody else. So the fuck what.
Huh? 
Erislover said that it would have been better if this was brought up to her earlier. I was showing him that it has been brought up earlier.
And who do you think is the “object of [my] scorn?” It’s not Duck Duck Goose, and if you think so, you should re-read my post. I specifically said that I do NOT find her annoying.
I’m really confused, here. Are you saying that because a thread has reached a certain length that no one new should participate or respond to points that have been made?
I was responding to DDG’s specific assertion that people regularly post Google-based answers in GQ. I never said that Googling was “lame.”
I was referring to this quote of yours:
which was then quoted with a bolded out “Thanks” from Hardy.
like I said, as if no one else had said that they found posting a google answer to be less than adequate.
Others of course have opined that isn’t what DDG does. and others still have said that they appreciate her efforts.
If it wasn’t your intent to put an additional slam on some one who hasn’t been fighting back for pages and pages, then I appologize.
however, hardy - I doubt that anyone here doesn’t get that you find DDG annoying on several levels. that you find her googling annoying in particular. You’ve been most clear in your opinion. and some share it. others do not.
Hence my “x number think its’ lame, y number appreciate it, no, wait, it’s now x number and one”.
It would seem, nearly 8 pages later, that there’s not a clear consensus here. It’s not like the Kaykay thread where even folks who liked her said “yea, can ya maybe post some non sex thoughts some times?”.
So what is the real aim here now? to count up (a la Milo )exactly how many find it annoying vs. how many who do not?
and then what? “gee, ducky 52% find it annoying, vs. the 48% who appreciate it, so you better slack off” or put your own percentages in if it makes you feel better. same difference.
Green Bean . For the sake of wring and myself, would you quote the part of the post of notthemamma in the old thread which indicates that she(DDG) was acting as a junior mod. I missed it.
Part of the problem with DDG is that as a cyber personality she is so damn powerful. No one has made me cringe like her in opposition and no one is more welcome to take my side in debate. When DDG responds to a pit complaint about her she is very, very effective in pit appropriate response which can easily be interpreted as over the top.
I want to add that just because a forum exists to lodge a complaint against another poster it is still advisable to consider the feelings of the person being pitted. Is the “transgression” worth the possible hurt done to the pitted party? No one likes to be criticized for their style, particularly by such a popular and respected poster such as Jarbabyj
I will also add that if we are ever asked for nominations for the office of SDMB moderator, I would submit for DDG
That wasn’t the point of the link, samclem, the link was to inform me that she had been in the pit at least once before, even if under a different persona and a long time ago—more of a factual aside than anything else (that’s how I took it). I don’t think it was intended to be anything other than that.
I’ll give you one man’s view from back in the Notthemama period. Keep in mind that I was driven to tell her “Shaddup, you sanctimonious know-it-all!” back then (something I really haven’t felt the need to repeat since she came back as DDG).
Back then, Notthemama had the newbie habit of posting incessantly in almost every area of the boards. Such a broad post spasm is something we’ve seen many others do, and usually after a while they settle down. Unfortunately, when Notthemama posted, she (or as I thought, he, since she was deliberately coy about her gender then) seemed to feel the need to definatively state her opinion about what was going on in an excessive number of threads.
At that point it wasn’t quite “Junior Mod” territory. But consider this quote from the referenced thread:
Taken in isolation, it isn’t particularly noteworthy. However, feeling the need to opine (without basis) on whether a prior post was from the sock puppet of one of two then-current trolls was typical of Notthemama. More personally irritating was her comment that I had a “need to ride forth into battle on behalf of [my] sister.” If you read the (rather lengthy) OP, it is clear that it is not a defense of my sister, Green Bean, but rather an attack on a poster I felt to be a self-absorbed turd.
During that era, she would sanctimoniously make pronouncements on anything and everything. Interestingly enough, she developed a coterie of sock puppet trolls that would follow her around and snipe at her heels.
Shortly after the linked thread, Notthemama stopped posting. A new poster, Duck Duck Goose, started up at about the same time, but gave no indication that she was the former Notthemama, and more important, didn’t share the obvious and irritating style of Notthemama. Eventually, folks made the connection, but by then DDG was well established in her new identity, which later grew the added feature of answering a noticable number of questions with Google searches, which were almost always accurate and informative.
I must say that I don’t like this vulgar and abusive Duck Duck Goose that seems to have appeared in the past few weeks. I found Notthemama irritating and the old DDG helpful and often delightful (though a few times irritating).
Again, perhaps a break for recentering would be in order.
Unfortunately, THIS was my exact point…posting a Google answer is less than adequate in a lot of cases And yes, DDG DOES do that consistently.
I’ll shut up now.
No offense, but that makes one of you. Childish behavior is NOT a criteria I would look for in a mod.
christ xploder - would you please go back and review what I was saying?
I was pointing out Hardy’s inane, bolded out "thanks to GreenBean for posting that same god damn sentiment.
and, as you’ve correctly asserted, you posted the same concept yourself quite some time ago. as did a couple of other people.
Point #1. It was hardly a ‘new concept/thought’ to this thread when hardy did her “THANKS” comment (aka “me too”). and not her first of this thead.
Point #2. Even though some people have that opinion, that essentially ‘all she does is post a link to google’, a number of other people have shared their opinion that no, that’s not what she does. That they find her posts quite helpful.
So, IOW, not only wasn’t it a new thought, new concept worthy of a “gasp some one finally says what I’ve been thinking”, but it also isn’t necessarily a given.
we’re clear into page 8. DDG hasn’t posted a single word here since page 4.
3 and a half pages of people chiming in their opinions of what kind of poster they think she is.
Pile ons are rarely pretty. When the object of such a pile on is an avowed racist, troll, sock, fucknickle, it at least can be understandable.
when the object is some one that at least a significant number of people (including some mods, admins, and well respected posters like minty, tom etc, ) see some distinct value in them, then it’s amazingly petty.
disclaimer : when I suggest that this pile on is petty and ugly, I am in no way ‘telling’ anyone that they shouldn’t/mustn’t/won’t post absolutely every fucking grieveance you’ve ever had against this woman for the past several years.
It speaks volumes.
Well since I was NOT talking about you (and, btw, thanks for the mustard which I never got the chance to say), please ignore it.
guilty
Again, guilty. My point is that people seem to have got away from the main point of the damn thread, which is that DDG tends to post a lot of links and that’s pretty much it. Don’t get me wrong though, I HAVE found her links to be helpful on occasion but for the most part, no.
Well, at least thanks for the disclaimer 
Look wring I DO tend to respect you as a poster, even if our political observations seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum but I do NOT agree that what DDG has been doing is okay. Can we leave it at that? If not you can get my email from my profile and let me know.
damn…guess I did a real good job of fucking up my coding huh?