Immoderate moderator?

Is it just me, or is this moderator’s response a bit beyond the pale?

I do appreciate what the moderators do here, for very little appreciation, but aren’t they subject to a certain SDMB etiquette like the rest of us?

I do believe that you must reference this thread as well:

Would you open a new topic to reply to a crummy closed thread by a banned poster?

No; but compare my post count to mobo85’s. And the thread you referenced was closed with only the most cryptic of comments by the moderator. Would you have had any idea what was going on if you were a relative newbie?

A. What Smackfu said.
B. The place for all criticism of moderators is in the Pit, not ATMB. :wink:
C. I thought Manhattan expressed himself with truly stupendous self-restraint, for him. Mobo’s damn lucky, if you ask me.
D. Good point about the newbies. However, one might reasonably expect them to keep their wide little eyes open and observe, and thus come to eventual wisdom.

[list=A][li]:rolleyes:[/li][li]This wasn’t intended as a “complaints and other discussion regarding administration of the SDMB” exactly, as the description of the Pit delineates, but as “questions and concerns about the SDMB,” as this forum is described. I have no intention of opening this in the Pit, as I have no intention of flaming Manhattan regarding this issue; it was an honest inquiry. If I should have emailed an administrator instead, I’m sorry; I thought this was the proper forum for such a question.[/li][li]If you consider “I really don’t need this shit if the membership is not going to cooperate”–as a response to someone who was quite obviously making an innocent mistake in his attempt to be helpful–to be “stupendous self-restraint,” then I’m glad I’m not married to you.[/li][li]How wide open would you expect newbies to remain if this is the kind of kneejerk feedback they can expect from the mods?[/li]Thanks, DDG and smackfu, for expressing yourselves, but I wasn’t really seeking your particular opinions (though I’m thrilled to death of course to have them): I was asking a question regarding the actual rules, if any, for moderators’ conduct in the boards.[/list]

The Pit IS intended for questions concerning the moderation of the Board. And these questions need not have any flaming or complaining content whatsoever, such as the following thread:

Why was the Hotwire Thread Locked?

Then like you already said…you should have e-mailed. If you post something in a public forum, people will answer. Like myself.

Okay, I’m gonna try this one time. If this don’t get it for you, I’ll move the thread to the Pit and you can continue there.

For the most part our moderators and adminstrators do do the voodoo that they do so well in good disposition. However, occasionally they encounter a member of the Teeming Millions that thinks rules are for other people . . . that plays the fool . . . that gets off on the bad foot and keeps on going that way, even after being asked multiple times to shape up.

We get really irritated with these folks, especially if we’ve tried to show them better ways and they just ain’t listening.

While we’re sometimes capable of leaping tall buildings at a single bound and some of us are faster than a speeding bullet, none of us have much patience with repeated idiocy and/or continued annoyance and will get cranky at times. We’re very human and mostly, under the circumstances, we’re entitled. There’s been posters here that would make Jesus cry.

Not only are moderators and administrators expected to live by the same rules as the Teeming Millions, they’re actually held to a higher standard, as all too often circumstances are such that they can’t truly drop the gloves and defend themselves like the Teemsters can do. It takes a very special person to grit their teeth in the face of that kind of abuse and keep on doing their job. Under those circumstances, an occasional pithy comment or sharp statement is understandable.

your humble TubaDiva

Look, I’m sorry about that already! How was I supposed to know he had a traumatic childhood experience involving toothpaste, too?!?

C. Hey, come on, Lissener, you’ve been here longer than I have. You’ve seen how quick Manny is to flick the switchblade open and start slicing. IMO, Mobo should glance down below his bellybutton and say a silent prayer of thanks to the God of Cojones, whoever he may be. FWIW, I didn’t interpret the thread as “someone who was quite obviously making an innocent mistake in his attempt to be helpful”–instead, I saw someone making a rather feeble attempt at humor. Any other mod would have probably shrugged and said, “Okay, very funny, ha ha” and simply locked the thread. But Manhattan, being the person he is, switched on the flamethrower and made a couple of 10 meter sweeps. So Mobo’s a little singed around the edges, but happy to be alive, and hopefully a little wiser for the experience. I’ve felt the touch of Manny’s flamethrower myself a few times, and I didn’t run to the Pit and start whining about it, and hopefully I’m a little wiser for the experience.

D. I would expect newbies to learn that this is the kind of kneejerk feedback they can expect from Manhattan, the same way I would expect them to learn that if they put their finger in a light socket, they’re gonna get a shock. “Don’t screw around in GQ” is the lesson here.

This will be brief; I’m busily ordering a 5 lb. box of Godiva chocolates for TubaDiva at the moment.

Not busting your chops for human curiosity, lissener, but the reasons for some actions won’t be obvious. This place is too big and too busy for consensus on everything. That’s why “troll outing” was stopped: it ate up bandwidth, caused ill will and frankly didn’t solve much.

Let’s face it: most people don’t read every post in every thread in every forum. But moderators are assigned to various beats, and talk to each another. So there’s an overview happening, okay? Innocent, occassional goofs happen, but chronic offenders are usually warned individually and privately. It gives them a chance to clean up their act, and reduces pointless bloodshed on the boards.

We want posters, so clobbering someone for flagrant idiocy is a last resort. If someone gets their leash yanked, it sure wasn’t the first time.


That’s certainly understandable, but in a context similar to this one, is it fair to berate a relatively new user for not knowing the attitude the moderators’ have toward a specific user? I suspect that one sentence explaining the initial thread locking would have prevented the second thread from being created – not because the moderators need to justify their actions, just to clear up confusion.

It seemed that Mobo was raising another question that occurred in the (first) locked thread, rather than intentionally defying a moderator. It just seems like it makes this message board very uninviting for newer users if they are going to be admonished for not knowing who ‘dippy’ is.

The only problem I have with this is that I’d have done what Mobo did if there was something in the locked thread that interested me and I know who dippy is.

Why? I hear you all saying, would I do such a thing. Well because of this.

Bolding mine. From

While this situation is not exactly the same I would have thought I was ok in starting a thread about something that came up in a locked or deleted thread once it was within the rules of the board.

Now I don’t know what to think. :confused:

Manhattan meant what he said: posts on topics that are worthwhile. That also means forum appropriate too.

It looks like what Mobo did was re-open a topic that was not on a GQ-worthy subject but rather was started by a problem child with the express intention of irritating the moderators.

your humble TubaDiva

there’s a sig-line and a half!!!

but seriously,
I think we should’ve gotten Manhattan in here to clarify his post.

but then again, that guy looks a lot like he’s just trolling, as Tubadiva said, and just looking to get a rise out of the mods…

Well, manhattan would normally be delighted to drop in here and have a chat about good manners with lissener, but at the moment he’s busy down in the basement, plunging out the guest sdorgi.