Sure it was. Part of the underlying discussion was about rape, and if there is anything we learned from the Great Trainwreck About Rape That Shall Not Be Named it’s that Starving Artist shouldn’t be talking about rape.
How old does shit have to be before it’s “inappropriate” to bring it up? Am I allowed to mention adaher’s skewed poll predictions? Are we barred from discussing Deflategate in threads where Elv1sL1ves is participating?
I gotta agree that that post deserved a warning. That is the worst post I have ever seen on the internet.
If RNATB says he never heard the rule, I believe him. It’s a poorly crafted rule.
Geez, I thought I was going crazy. I’m glad somebody here is taking this seriously.
If there’s ever been a more brutal assault than mentioning something weird somebody said in the past, I don’t want to know about it.
For the record, I did not ask for the rule under discussion nor am I hiding behind it.
The purpose of the rule was twofold: One, to keep discussion of the Paterno thread limited to the Paterno thread because the mods felt the subject was so upsetting they didn’t want it cropping up all over the board; and two, because I had been forbidden to mention anything having to do with Paterno/Sandusky outside that thread, it would clearly be improper to allow other posters to snipe at me at will when I was prohibited from defending myself.
RNATB also violated the rule against insults outside the Pit and IMO should have been warned or mod noted for that as well.
It cannot categorically be an insult to mention something stupid someone has posted. Criticizing each other’s posts, respectfully or snarkily, is what makes the board go round.
One can imagine a rule saying that you only get to criticize posts made in the thread in question. But at least one mod is very fond of criticizing posts in outside threads and bringing them in as context for understanding, so I don’t see that rule coming into fruition any time soon.
Actually no, it wasn’t. Sure Trump made that claim some time ago, but SA didnt discuss that, nor did the interview even mention it, except obliquely. Did you actually listen to that interview?
Could you point to the post where I insulted you?
It was the whole reason they were discussing the crime rates of illegal immigrants and whether Trump could win Latino votes. To answer your question, I only watched bits of the interview.
Actually no, it wasn’t. Sure Trump made that claim some time ago, but SA didnt discuss that, nor did the interview even mention it, except obliquely. Did you actually listen to that interview?
If it’s appropriate, but not on a unrelated thread. There wasn’t anything there about the Paterno case.
Are you discussing the New England Patriots? If the answer is no, then no.
This thing you have of “Hey I think poster said something stupid years ago, so I will dredge it up over and over again, every time he posts” is not a good idea.
Rape wasnt mentioned.
It was clearly a personal attack. Please don’t try to claim otherwise.
As a relatively new poster (who may, however unlikelily, accidentally mention paper towel tubes in a thread where SA (did I get that right?) is also posting), I have to say I understand there’s some kind of rule…about something…that I may fall foul of…somehow. Good work, moderators! I’m sure I’ll deserve it, whatever it is, and whatever it’s for. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for not knowing what the law is, after all.
Also, I did follow the link in the OP and I still don’t get what weird amusing thing happened. Someone PM me, eh?
For what it’s worth, which isn’t much, I see your point, RNATB.
The post in question was clearly being modded for “not following mod instructions” (to not mention this stuff) rather than for content per se. But those instructions are presumably buried in some thread(s) somewhere that many of us have never seen. This is being treated as if RNATB had been personally warned about this in the past, which apparently was not the case.
I respectfully submit that a good rule of thumb is that if a mod warning genuinely surprises both the accused and many impartial observers, as is the case here, then maybe the warning wasn’t really justified. If a warning is for not following some very case-specific mod instructions, it seems unfair to base that on instruction(s) given at other time(s) in other thread(s) and assuming that everyone knows about it. I know it’s a tough call sometimes. This is why mods get the big bucks! 
Which is how I am kept in the style to which I have become accustomed.
I asked him to point to where I insulted him.
FWIW, I don’t.
If you know enough about the boards to make the dig, you know enough not to make it.
No, you can’t have your pile-on. Get over it.
Regards,
Shodan
FWIW, I don’t believe that Shodan doesn’t believe RNATB.
Whether or not Really Not All That Bright knew the rule is rather beside the point. It was clearly a personal attack on SA, which is not kosher outside the PIT.
In any case, I find it hard to believe that Really Not All That Bright didn’t know the rule, since she so familiar with the reference.
It’s not like we were discussing Bounty vs Brawny in MPSIMS, and you mentioned casually you recycled the tubes from them. Really Not All That Bright was clearly familiar enough with the reference to use it as a snarky personal attack on SA, thus she should know the rule that goes with it.
In any case, it was a snarky personal attack .
Reported.:rolleyes:
So we’re going to hang our hat on the fine line between a personal attack and a personal insult? When both are against the rules int that forum? At least you seem to admit it was a personal attack. How about if Jonathan Chance reworded his warning then? Still a warning.