But surely those people could just ignore the content that upsets them. 
WTF? You just posted two “facts” (one is demonstrably not true) and no one is allowed to respond? Why did you feel the need to post your facts in that case?
Moderator Note
Don’t disregard moderator instructions. No warning issued, but the subject is closed in this thread.
Colibri
All right, go ahead and answer. Which one of these do you think is not true?
Apparently it’s open again.
Interesting. I’m noted by a mod for disregarding another mod’s instructions and immediately the other mod gives me the okay to disregard and prove something to him.
ECG, why not answer my previous questions first, and then go ahead and back up that Giraffeboards has a forum dedicated to snarking and making fun of people on the SDMB?:
“You just posted two “facts” (one is demonstrably not true) and no one is allowed to respond? Why did you feel the need to post your facts in that case?”
I see both of you on the ground, rubbing your foreheads in pain and staring between you at the ball you were both running for.
Of course I wasn’t issued a warning. Warning a poster for merely claiming a statement isn’t true wouldn’t go over so great here, would it?
Violation of moderator instructions is warnable, which you of course know.
The “Behind Your Back” forum is for snarking on the rest of the internet. At any given time there is ONE (count it, ONE) thread specifically for snarking on the SDMB. Previous threads for this purpose are closed and locked. Just because the membership is more interested in snarking on this board does not mean the entire forum is only for Durp snark. Your “fact” is incorrect.
And nobody on the Giraffe Boards is responsible for any “stirring up” individuals might experience upon reading the threads they elected to open. That’s their problem, and there is not one thing stopping members here from opening accounts in order to refute statements they feel are wrong or to in any other way assuage their rustled jimmies. As a matter of fact, not a few Dopers have their very own threads in which they can argue and insult back just as much as they like. So whereas it might be more or less factual that people get stirred up, I might point out that sometimes people get stirred up by things they read on the Dope, too. So? What significance does that have?
Right’ “of course I do”, so why state it here? Your response doesn’t exactly fit my last post.
The moderator found it necessary to make statements as facts and then warn others that they can’t be rebutted.
All I did was say that one of them, without mentioning which, was not true. Warning me for that wouldn’t go over well here and would make the moderation here look pathetic.
Heh. Yeah, people can simul-post, and mods can simul-mod, and sometimes we don’t agree.
Colibri is right on this one. Ed doesn’t want us discussing Giraffeboards here, so let’s have no more discussion about it.
Don’t know why you guys get so indignant over this. There was definitely rallying of the troops and congratulatory back slaps over jabs made here. The Skald thing and the Shagnasty pitting come to mind among other things. I know the “purpose” of Behind Your Back isn’t to foment trouble here but you probably should tone down the righteousness.
It’s a TRAP!
You seemed to agree just fine with others not discussing it. You just thought you had a special exemption to post facts about a topic not allowed to be discussed and then made sure to remind folks that they could only be rebutted privately. That is, until I said you were wrong, that you couldn’t handle, so you told me I could discuss a topic you admit you’re aware Ed said could not be discussed…Until another poster demonstrated that you were indeed wrong. In that case we’d all better listen to Ed.
Sorry. I see my post was composed in between ecg reopening and reclosing the subject.
Couldn’t handle? You don’t know me very well. I’m happy to admit when I’m wrong. And I am always open to being wrong because that’s how I learn.
In this case, the only thing wrong is what I would call a fairly minor nitpick, it’s a thread, not a forum. That’s a minor labeling problem, not being factually incorrect.
If you, or anyone else, thinks that I am incorrect about any other aspect of this, feel free to send me a PM. Maybe you can convince me I’m wrong in other things too, who knows.
But no more public discussion of Giraffe here.
Look - nobody is to stone anybody, even if - and I want to make this absolutely clear - they do say Jehovah.
Regards,
The Knights who Until Recently Said [del]Giraffe[/del] Ni
PS - cite.
Does this include responding to my posts? Because that seems to be the norm already.
I know you well enough to see the dodge here. You talked about a forbidden topic, told others they can’t talk about it, when I said you were wrong regarding that topic, you allowed me to speak about it. When you were shown to be wrong, you didn’t admit anything (yet claim doing so makes you happy) and disallowed the topic again.
You’re a moderator on a message board. You know the difference between a forum and a thread. Claiming that a member here has a message board which has a “forum dedicated to snarking and making fun of people on the SDMB” is a big step up from having a message board where another member started a thread about the SDMB. “Fairly minor” my ass.
Trying to get the last word in? I’m not discussing Giraffe here. You’re not either, right?
The questions I asked which you haven’t answered, aren’t pertinent to just another message board:
“You just posted two “facts” (one is demonstrably not true) and no one is allowed to respond? Why did you feel the need to post your facts in that case?”
Regardless if it was about another message board or some generic topic, why post “facts” regarding a topic that we’re not allowed to discuss? This isn’t just any message board, it’s one that claims to be about fighting ignorance. You’re allowed to make objective statements and then say that others aren’t allowed to rebut them?
I thought I heard something- must just be the wind.