“SlackerInc has been suspended pending discussion of his future posting privileges.”
Who the hell cares whether you read them, even if you hadn’t it’s still the rules. You’re responsible for knowing them.
As for your post? It was some nonsense.
You linked something that was intentionally posted to harm a woman by minimizing her ability to contribute to the House of Representatives. It attempts to lower her star by objectifying her and reducing her to a pair of breasts and making her child-like. You reposted it in the same manner. It is a shameful thing.
Take your lumps and move on. Perhaps grow from the experience.
You’ve been involved in enough discussions in ATMB that you should clearly know what the issue is by now. You may want a gray area where you can post these things, but you know darn well that this is exactly the type of thing that we are trying to eliminate here. You know that many here find this “icky” or “gross” (as you put it) and yet you posted it anyway.
I very strongly recommend that you not do that in the future.
Frankly, I find the idea that you are being made an example of to be not credible. I’ve been a moderator for just over two years, and in that time I’ve consistently pushed back against this type of objectification.
Regarding whether or not you’ve participated in several of the more current discussions is besides the point in my mind. The warning is justified sans those discussions. And whether or not what you wrote was hostile, disparaging, or even mocking is besides the point as well. Being a jerk doesn’t require those elements. But objectifying someone as merely a sex object when that is not at all related to their public profile is pretty jerky in my estimation.
Just because you find her attractive does not mean she “dresses and dances in an obviously sexually provocative way”. This is making it all about you. She didn’t dance for you, or dress for you. She danced and dressed a certain way for her own reasons.
Good moderation, IMO.
Can we refrain from calling for bannings in threads like these? We have perfectly capable moderation here, and it is solely moderators’ task to determine who needs suspension or banning. Calling for banning can easily start to feel like a lynch mob outside the sheriff’s office calling for the horse thief to be hanged right the fuck now. It is unbecoming the SDMB.
How about a compromise? We could set up a sticky (pun intended) where he and his fellows can curate a running list of politicians they’d like to fuck. If we did it right, maybe put a little automated counter in there so he’d think that people were actually looking at them, maybe give them some more latitude in description so they can keep each other interested, it could relieve the pressure of needing to tell us in unrelated threads how their penises feel about things.
Let’s just invoke Fenris’s Law[sup]tm, pat.pndg[/sup] and close the thread.
Given that you are neither the first nor the only person to have been warned for this, this is an absurd statement.
Really, you only have two choices on how to go on this: “I was totally clueless about the issue” or “trolling.” I see you are going with the former. But cluelessness doesn’t absolve you from a warning.
#MeToo, except I believe it’s more paranoia than anything else.
Because she was JUST ELECTED? Duh.
I find it interesting that Bone had to think about it, constructing a path leading to warn, digging for a judgment.
Perhaps he overlooked the fact that all of you is only about half of us.
Moderation merely reflects the offcial tone here, so just get over it. People can read words simultaneously injecting parralellistic personal bias into their comprehension regardless of the factual value of the information.
Sounds almost deplorable.
This implies that no men could possibly object to sexist comments, which clearly demonstrates you don’t understand the issue at all.
This sounds very sardonic and sophisticated, but I understand almost nothing of it, and I frankly have no idea which side of the issue you are supporting (if any), nor what any of your points mean.
Are you mocking the MeToo movement, or mocking Slackerinc for thinking it’s a conspiracy?
What exactly is your criticism of Bone, why is it “interesting”? I can’t tell if you are saying that the warning required a convoluted path of reasoning and was therefore wrong, or the complete opposite - that you think the misogyny was so obvious that no detailed path of reasoning should need to be stated.
Who is “you” and “us” referencing? Presumably you must mean men vs women, but since I don’t know which you are, I don’t know what your point is. I have no idea what the sentence that I bolded is supposed to mean, nor why a presumed reference to Clinton’s “deplorables” comment is relevant here.
Maybe this is just my own shortcoming, but it’s too subtle for me - I’ve noticed a couple of your posts recently that have left me scratching my head like this.
No, I understand it differently than you do.
The election was two months ago.
SlackerInc’s post had zero input on past or future elections.
Slackerinc made a post about how he was adding AOC to his spankbank. Full stop. If that wasn’t clear enough, he followed it up with this comment in the Pit:
That thrilling bit of news came in a thread titled: Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, on How to Pay for Medicare for All.
I know you must think your usage of the term #metoo is clever and cute, but it in reality it’s pathetic and sad.
Dream on.
You also ask alot of questions. None of which I understand.
Now warn me for trolling.
You will hear people complain “You can’t say X any more”, and often X will be something fairly scurrilous. But when we get to the point of forbidding what amounts to, as another generation might call it, “Hubba Hubba”, it’s approaching moral panic territory.
Uhhh…yeah. In politics. 
Not at all sure what your definition of “political people” is (in the context of Twitter), but it’s apparently quite different from mine.
Erm, ok. I think I was pretty clear in my questions. I guess it’s more important to you to sound condescending and supercilious than to actually communicate anything.
You don’t appear to understand that continuing with the “I’m clueless on the issue” defense doesn’t actually improve your position.
I think you understand “understand” differently than I do.
Nobody is asking for him to be hung, they’re asking for him to be banned from a freaking message board. Bit of a difference there. And this isn’t the first time he has done something like this, so people are rightfully fed up.