Thank you for gracefully accepting a judgment call on my part.
Would that the mods could accept questioning of those judgment calls with the same grace.
Regards,
Shodan
You know how I hate it when I have to agree with you. 
[czar] is unable or unwilling to explain his bullshit call here, but is unable to restrain himself from tossing in snarky comments. That is the behavior of a bully.
I WAS responding, directly, to the OPer. He made a comment after the warning that said he wanted to avoid fire and brimstone readings. I responded to it. Why would I assume that it was not kosher for me to do that?
-
It was completely innocuous. And if you took offense to it, that was not my intention.
-
The OPer himself brought the issue up himself.
-
We’re supposed to be allowed to fight ignorance here.
-
Traditionally, it is the OPer, not the Moderators, who define the scope of their own thread. That’s the way it’s always worked around here and the way I believe it should still be.
-
The “fire and brimstone” comment had nothing to do with the tangent re the appropriateness of an atheist getting married in the church, and it was that tangent that drew the warning.
-
If the “fire and brimstone” comment was truly out of line, then the OPer should have been the one who received the warning. Hence, dinsdale’s first ATMB thread.
Lately, you mention politics or religion around this place, and everyone assumes the crash position. What a shame.
Big fat hairy chance of that. But hey, Czarcasm has weighed himself in the balance and not found himself wanting, so all’s well. Snark on religion all you like, accuse the entire Church of being homophobic paedophiles who should be only too happy that anyone deigns to get married there at all, but don’t you point out that one of the few things you can pick and choose in a wedding ceremony is the Bible readings and (gasp!) perhaps you should have a leaf through the hateful tome and find something acceptable.
If you are referring to my last post, it was a sincere response to PunditLisa’s last post.
You do realize that the thread in question was in IMHO, not Great Debates, so none of what you mentioned above would have been allowed.
Okay, I’ll give you that one. But given your prior posts in these various threads I don’t think it entirely unreasonable that I interpreted it otherwise. IMO you have still acted like a bully.
Czarcasm said:
This is the root of my complaint. You acknowledge this was a judgment call on your part. I am fine with that. I understand much of the nature of moderating is judgment calls.
But what is lacking here is any indication that you have reevaluated the situation based upon the explanations provided, or that given several people have expressed outright dismay at how you could interpret it the way you did, that anybody has given it a second evaluation. But you have also failed to justify your decision, or explain your position. It’s a call out of left field, it’s undefended, and reasoned questioning of the call has gone without response.
So what’s the process? You made a decision on the fly and that’s it, no recourse, no appeal? Because I have seen moderators here change their calls based upon reasoned explanation. But I’m not getting that in this case – not just the change your mind part, but even an idication that you might have been wrong, or that it is a questionable call, or that anyone on the mod staff has reevaluated it.
And the more I ask the question about the process and don’t get an answer, the more I’m left to assume that there is no process.
So, can I get an answer to this question:
Which is it?
I didn’t get reports about either post in my email, otherwise I might have done something about them. I’m might be striving for perfection, but I’m not there just yet, o.k.?
BTW, the infraction has been lifted. For further information, see thread in question.
Thank you.
And to all who championed my cause, thank you, too.
Excellent, ignorance has been fought successfully, finally. Congrats to you, Lisa.
Czarcasm said:
Thank you for the response. (Seriously.)