# I have been warned

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694>\
**Category:** About This Message Board\
**Created:** [November 15, 2009, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694 "2009-11-15T22:18:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![FloatyGimpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/floatygimpy/32/7750_2.png) [@FloatyGimpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FloatyGimpy)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/1 "2009-11-15T22:18:21Z")

</div>

I don’t think I’ve ever started a pit thread but I could be wrong. So as far as my memory goes, this is my first one so hopefully it doesn’t suck too bad. There won’t be much raging because I’m not actually that mad.

I’m pretty much a non-entity around here which is how I like it. I don’t try to start any trouble and most of my contributions have to do with kittens and that sort of thing. So I was quite surprised when I got a warning for this:

> **[Ignore list](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=540024)**
>
> I don’t suppose there is anyway, when you have someone on your ignore list, that you don’t have to see when they’ve been quoted? I believe you can learn a lot, even from people with whom you strongly disagree so I don’t generally put people on my...

My goal in posting that was hoping someone would take pity on me and let me know if I could completely ignore someone.

Many of my childhood memories consist of being tossed a towel so I could wipe the ejaculate off myself. Not really a fun thing for a 7 year old. Reading about someone who wants to be allowed to fuck babies is a bit distressing to me. I’ve never called for anyone to be banned, I just personally don’t want to read about the fantasies of a pedophile. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

I wasn’t even angry about the warning, it was sort of a bit funny to me. This is how it kind of seems from my perspective:

Thread about children  
Cesario “I wish I could fuck babies”  
Moderators “…”

Thread about sex  
Cesario “I wish I could fuck babies”  
Moderators “…”

Thread about breaking the law  
Cesario “I wish I could fuck babies”  
Moderators “…”

Thread about something else  
Cesario “I wish I could fuck babies”  
Moderators “…”

FloatyGimpy “I wish I didn’t have to listen to him”  
Moderator "WARNING WARNING!!! Permanent yellow square by your name which will NEVER EXPIRE!!!

I actually don’t know if I’ve done something wrong by making this thread and posting it in the pit so sorry if I’ve broken some other rule.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/2 "2009-11-15T22:21:06Z")

</div>

> [@FloatyGimpy](#):
>
> I actually don’t know if I’ve done something wrong by making this thread and posting it in the pit so sorry if I’ve broken some other rule.

You did nothing wrong by starting this thread. They go in About This Message Board now. I’ll move it for you.

Gfactor  
Pit Moderator

Moved from The BBQ Pit to About This Message Board.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![FloatyGimpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/floatygimpy/32/7750_2.png) [@FloatyGimpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FloatyGimpy)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/3 "2009-11-15T22:27:19Z")

</div>

> [@Gfactor](#):
>
> You did nothing wrong by starting this thread. They go in About This Message Board now. I’ll move it for you.
> 
> Gfactor  
> Pit Moderator
> 
> Moved from The BBQ Pit to About This Message Board.

Ok, thank you.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/4 "2009-11-15T22:32:29Z")

</div>

> [@FloatyGimpy](#):
>
> Ok, thank you.

You’re welcome. 😃 I’ll let \*\*xash \*\*respond to your OP, now that we’re in the right forum.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/5 "2009-11-15T22:34:50Z")

</div>

Egregious. Just plain egregious. Sorry you have been burned.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/6 "2009-11-15T22:37:46Z")

</div>

I posted this in the linked thread:

I don’t think a warning is in order. She didn’t identify the poster, and it’s not clear who the poster is to anyone who did not read a certain thread or threads.

Yes, she could have posted the question without the example that caused her to ask it; but I think an official warning is not merited.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/7 "2009-11-15T22:40:11Z")

</div>

I think the rule that one can name names in the Pit but nowhere else is a little precious to begin with.

I think warning someone for not naming names, but supplying facts that might permit an inference in a non-Pit forum–and then when a third party asks for the identity of the ignored party, the warning mod _invites_ creating a thread in the Pit to name the person–is mod behavior more fitting for a **Sicssorjack** -esque surrealist parody, not actual enforcement of the board’s rules.

This particular trap for the unwary should be undone, the rule should be strictly construed (actually, the rule should be eliminated, but dare to dream–who has ever heard of the SDMB ruleset _decreasing_ in number?!), and the warning should be expunged.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/8 "2009-11-15T22:53:30Z")

</div>

Particularly since the end result is that this pit thread containing the name now sits in ATMB.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/9 "2009-11-16T02:28:24Z")

</div>

> [@FloatyGimpy](#):
>
> My goal in posting that was hoping someone would take pity on me and let me know if I could completely ignore someone

Taking into consideration your intentions and the circumstances that prompted you to include that information, I will rescind your warning.

I am sorry if this has caused you any pain. My intention was merely to apply the rules, and my initial read was that you included that information as a dig at the poster in question; I see now that you did not include that information in bad faith.

I do hope that my solution to your question in the original thread allows you a better experience on these boards.

- **xash**  
Administrator

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![FloatyGimpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/floatygimpy/32/7750_2.png) [@FloatyGimpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FloatyGimpy)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/10 "2009-11-16T02:31:34Z")

</div>

Wow, thank you so much! 🙂 And your link did completely rectify the problem so again, thank you.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/11 "2009-11-16T03:06:10Z")

</div>

**xash** : I applaud your decision.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/12 "2009-11-16T04:31:54Z")

</div>

Classy move.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/13 "2009-11-16T06:13:08Z")

</div>

I do think, since this kind of complaint is being moved to ATMB now, that the same leeway for naming other users (not abusively, but like the OP did in the other thread) should apply here, too.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/14 "2009-11-16T09:51:26Z")

</div>

I just don’t understand this rule. Either the contents of your ignore list should be private and undisclosed, or it shouldn’t. Being able to disclose it in just one forum seems daft. What’s to stop someone starting a thread in ATMB, not naming the ignored person, and simultaneously opening another thread in the Pit, referencing the thread in ATMB, and naming the ignored person?

I appreciate that that would go against the spirit of the rules, and could be considered jerkish, but…

It should be completely private, or completely open.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/15 "2009-11-16T13:59:31Z")

</div>

> [@NineToTheSky](#):
>
> I just don’t understand this rule. Either the contents of your ignore list should be private and undisclosed, or it shouldn’t. Being able to disclose it in just one forum seems daft. What’s to stop someone starting a thread in ATMB, not naming the ignored person, and simultaneously opening another thread in the Pit, referencing the thread in ATMB, and naming the ignored person?
> 
> I appreciate that that would go against the spirit of the rules, and could be considered jerkish, but…
> 
> It should be completely private, or completely open.

I think you’re missing the point of the rule. We don’t particularly care if other people know who is on your ignore list. However, _telling them_ who is on the list is essentially an insult. You’re basically telling them, “Nyah! Nyah!, I’m not listening to you.” As an insult, it is permitted in the Pit, but prohibited elsewhere on the board.

In this case, the primary intent seems to have been to obtain information about how the ignore list functions, rather than to directly insult another poster. The issue is insults, not the list itself.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/16 "2009-11-16T17:15:45Z")

</div>

Excellent rescission, **xash**! The sign of good moderation is to always be open to rethinking a decision when appropriate.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/17 "2009-11-16T17:34:14Z")

</div>

> [@NineToTheSky](#):
>
> I just don’t understand this rule. Either the contents of your ignore list should be private and undisclosed, or it shouldn’t. Being able to disclose it in just one forum seems daft. What’s to stop someone starting a thread in ATMB, not naming the ignored person, and simultaneously opening another thread in the Pit, referencing the thread in ATMB, and naming the ignored person?

Heck, I remember a GD argument that had someone ending a post like:

Post in GD:

“…but you only claim that {url=link to new pit thread}because-{/url}”

OP of Pit thread:

“-you suck!”

Or something to that effect.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BunnyTVS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BunnyTVS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BunnyTVS)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/18 "2009-11-16T18:08:03Z")

</div>

Something I’ve been wondering for a while…

You’re in a discussion in GD(for example), and **poster** asks a specific question regarding a post you’ve made there.

**poster** happens to be on your ignore list, so you don’t see his post. Everyone else does see it though and start asking you to respond.

How do you tell them why you haven’t replied, _without_ revealling the fact that **poster** is on your ignore list?  
Or does the ignore feature work differently to the way I’m thinking?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Erasmus\_Darwin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c57346/32.png) [@Erasmus\_Darwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erasmus_Darwin)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/19 "2009-11-16T18:25:57Z")

</div>

> [@BunnyTVS](#):
>
> How do you tell them why you haven’t replied, _without_ revealling the fact that **poster** is on your ignore list?

“I didn’t see his post.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\
**Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694/20 "2009-11-16T18:30:53Z")

</div>

> [@Erasmus\_Darwin](#):
>
> “I didn’t see his post.”

“Could you look at it now and respond to it?”

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-been-warned/517694.md?page=2)
