I can arrange that, if you don’t mind me [del]assassinating a few key people[/del] giving a few key people eloquent and persuasive lectures in favor of chocolate sartorialism.
Probably something more along the lines of “they don’t want to deal with MY bullshit.”
Caveat advisor, I guess. Hurt feelings at seeing one’s sage advice spurned does not entitle a person to trade barbs in IMHO.
Why not? People trade barbs constantly on this message board - it’s how Cecil got his start. As long as those barbs don’t cross a line, why in the world shouldn’t we be allowed to do so?
I didn’t say it was forbidden. I said the provocation of seeing someone disregard your advice (quelle horreur!) doesn’t entitle you to do it. And if the modes have asked people to restrain themselves to prevent a pile-on . . . well, you trade barbs at your peril in that instance.
My only worry would be that Agent Foxtrot hadn’t seen the notice, since they’re easy to overlook in threads with 100+ posts. But he didn’t raise the issue, so I assume he did know what the rules of engagement were at the time of his posting.
“You’re a real piece of work” is a mild insult, typically uttered by a gumshoe and directed to a dame.
That reminds me of a show on National Geographic called Locked Up Abroad. First I was wondering why they didn’t just call it Abroad Locked Up, figured they were trying to be clever or something. ..but not only that, the show wasn’t even about Abroad, it was about some guy! In some foreign jail somewhere!
What a stupid show.
What does it mean, then? Because I’ve always interpreted it to mean something fairly close to, “you’re a real asshole.” I’m open to correction on this point, though.
To me, it could also mean, “you’re a real piece of shit.” Again, it doesn’t sound complimentary. I think Ellen made the right call giving Agent Foxtrot the warning after Czarcasm told everybody to knock it off. Whether he thought it was Pitworthy or not, IMO, that is where he should have made it.
I always thought of it as a somewhat polite (or nicer) way of saying “you’re a bit of a jerk”. For what it’s worth.
Family friendly, where “you’re a piece of shit/an asshole” isn’t.
“You’re really messed up.”
Munch’s allegation that it doesn’t mean something pretty close to “asshole” can only be attributed to ignorance of the way it is commonly used.
False. Your very own description contradicts you. “Outlandish” does not equal “asshole” or even come close. Suggesting otherwise is outlandish. If I say “you’re acting irrationally”, I’m saying that you are exhibiting one or more extreme characteristics - none of them being an asshole or a prick. Try again.
To answer your question, I will admit that it certainly has a range of intended meanings. Colibri’s definition is close - outlandish, as in “you’re being outlandish*”. When I’ve used it or heard it used, you could easily substitute “you’re being exasperatingly difficult” - as you’re communicating that the person seems to be acting intentionally obtuse. Plenty of assholes are outlandish, intentionally obtuse or exasperatingly difficult - but not all (or even most) people being called a “real piece of work” are assholes.
Either way, I think it’s important that moderation stick to what people actually type, rather than what you think someone might possibly mean. Coming into a thread and telling everyone that “everything needs to be puppy dog kisses and rainbows from here on out” is garbage moderation. Remind people where the well-established line is, tell people which posters or comments are getting close to that line, and moderate at that line. Certainly we’ve seen enough ATMB threads to realize that moving that line is the cause of the vast majority of disapproval of moderation around here, no?
*defined as “Conspicuously unconventional; bizarre” or “Strikingly unfamiliar”.
“Outlandish” wasn’t the only definition he posted.
“Outlandish” was the harshest of definitions he posted. Do I need to defend my statement against even milder versions of the term as well?
I’d argue that “difficult” is the harsher definition. Outlandish is not necessarily pejorative at all - in some contexts, it’s complimentary. Is “difficult” synonymous with “asshole?” Not perfectly, but I note that the same site defines “asshole” as (among other things) “a rude, impolite person.” Which seems rather close to “difficult” to me.
Would you moderate me if I said, “STG, you’re difficult”? It’s snark - it’s the same as saying, “you’re a real peach, STG”. The only thing more pathetic than the increase of people getting their panties in a twist over snark is moderators handing out warnings for snark. It’s on the bright side of a not-very-grey line, why do we need to start moving the goalposts around to defend a shitty mod decision?
You always have the option to leave, Munch.
:rolleyes: I’m sorry, did I interrupt your Moderation Adoration Celebration? I know that questioning TPTB when they issue inconsistent warnings is anathema to those who want every thread to be filled with huggles and unicorn farts, but there was a time when snark was the rule and saccharine was the exception.