Kudos for Gfactor regarding Carol Stream

About This Message Board
41

@Xash

Thank you for taking over the thread moderation. There’s no better person for the job. Thank you, also, for the reminder that I myself ought to be civil despite whatever provocations I might encounter. It’s easy to just stay on topic and ignore snark. In fact, easier to do that than to engage in competitions over who can out-snoot whom. Getting knocked down a peg or two was something I needed in this instance.

@Poly

The contributions I have seen from Carol Stream were mostly in Great Debates. From time to time, he/she will post fairly long passages or parse other posts, but most often he/she (much like Shodan) offers only summations or one-liners. But I think a lot of conservatives (with exceptions, like Bricker) feel like they will be piled onto anyway, and that what they offer will be called trolling, and so it is with a defeatist attitude that they post. It’s much like if you were posting at Free Republic. After however many tries at explaning your reasoning, you will eventually give up, and either leave the site or just post your summations in order to have your voice heard.

With regards to the Pit, however, that’s what I thought the Pit was all about. Well maybe not all about, but certainly it is a longstanding attribute. The snark, I mean. Insults. Anger. All that sort of stuff. If Carol Stream, as you say, “puts in the Pit … pure snark done for the purpose of insulting and angering others” then he/she is just doing what everyone does there.

I think you’ve overexpanded or overbroadened the meaning of the term “troll”. For me, a prerequisite to trolling is the taking over of a thread, either by opening it from the start or by abruptly changing the subject. I don’t think it is trolling to attempt to piss people off when the context has already been established, and the person is posting in that context.

That’s exactly what “You’re a fucking moron” does and is intended to do, and that’s the kind of thing that the Pit is absolutely chock full of. There’s no reason to post “You’re a fucking moron” other than to piss the other person off. Therefore, in my eyes, you have failed to differentiate Carol Stream from any other Pit poster.

Finally, as for this:

(I’m remembering an incident that I hope Liberal won’t mind my bringing up, in which he called me a thief for holding it to be ethical and appropriate for government to fulfill our corporate responsibility for ensuring the poor and needy are taken care of – at the time, while a tenet of liberal thought, anathema to Lib’s libertarian principles. (We’ve since dealt with this and are the best of friends, which makes me comfortable using it as an example.)You must come to understand that I am one of the few liberals here, and that you are not. :slight_smile:

42

The ghost of William Ewart Gladstone lives on in you my brother! (And I assume you’ll take that as the compliment I intend it as. :))

43

Well, it’s not exactly a kitty pic thread, but I’m pleasantly surprised to see the poster that positively engaged on something…not as in character…it’s pretty recent, too; so maybe there’s some hope.

However, I do agree with Polycarp’s last paragraph; I went too strong at it, though.

44

You are correct, it is not a requirement in ATMB. You are within your rights to be snarky or sarcastic. Your brand of humor certainly lends itself well to sarcasm :slight_smile:

Your understanding of the rules is correct. However, whether or not a certain post is at or over that edge is sometimes a judgment call made by a moderator.

Our overarching rule is “Don’t be a jerk”.

Hope that clarifies it. In your case, there was no rules violation, and there was no compulsion to comply with my request. So thank you for considering.

-xash
Administrator

45

Absolutely. :slight_smile:

46

Thank you and no prob. Unless the idea of trying to codify “no pile-ons” and no “post-ban snark” as a rule comes back, I’ve pretty much said my piece here anyway.

I really appreciate the clarification though. :slight_smile:

47

Well, then you need to hang around. Because snarking at people who are unable to respond due to the adminstration or to moderators shutting them up is jerkish behavior, in my opinion. (And in the opinion of some admins and mods.)

How would you like it if you could not respond to this post? What if you could not defend your position, but I could attack it at will? I say you’re wrong, and that your tactics are bullyish, and are designed to push the buttons of your victim. I believe all people who cowardly attack defenseless people are trolls.

What if you were banned, suspended, or told that you could not respond to that?

48

I don’t think I’ve ever said this in 10 years here but… Cite?

Show me a warning for someone having fun at the expense of a banned troll*. I remember threads being closed and statements like “Enough’s enough” when the thread went too long. I remember people being warned for opening up new threads after a mod told them not to. But I can’t think of a single instance where someone was formally warned simply for snarking at a banned user.

So show me. Prove that “some admins and mods” (plurals, yours) have warned people for being “Jerks” for this.

Hey mods? Ruling here please? He’s point blank calling me a troll since I said I did this. If this kind of thing where you call someone a troll by syllogism is allowed, can I respond in kind?

In any case, turn down the drama about 20 notches Lib. “Victim”? “Attack”?! From words directed from a stranger on the internet to my screenname? Sheesh. :rolleyes:

A) I wouldn’t liken it to being tied up and beaten with sticks or spit on.
B) I either wouldn’t read it or I’d be pissed when I read it and post about it elsewhere (or talk to a real-life friend) or I’d read it to point and laugh at the posters/comments. Just depends on how witty it was.
C) But since I’m in no danger whatsoever (as far as I know) of being banned, I’m not all that worried about this hypothetical.

It’s words on a message board dude. I like many people here, I’ve made several real-life friends and it’s overall a great group of people, but I, like most of the grown-ups here, have gotten over the idea that strangers writing mean things about me are the end of the world and that if someone says something mean to me that I’m a “victim” being “attacked” as if by being beaten with sticks and spit upon…

And if it really IS such a concern, don’t get banned and it’s not an issue, is it? I can count maybe a half-dozen bannings (maybe) I disagree with in like 10 years. You generally have to earn a ban. And if you do, part of the penalty is people will point-and-laugh at you when you’re gone. It’s not like the Dope Staff is randomly rampaging through the forums banning people.

*Again, not Carol. She’s suspended and doesn’t count for this purpose.

49

In the context of this thread and my reading of Liberal’s intent, I’m going to allow that comment.

If Liberal’s comment was meant to insult you, or made with intent to be a jerk towards you, I would not allow it. My view, however, is that he stated it as a basis for substantiating his position in this thread.

My judgment in this instance does not qualify as blanket permission to use syllogism as a means to insult other posters.

-xash
Administrator

50

Fenris, that is the reality that you live with every day. You believe in speaking your truth and letting others speak theirs. You are able to shrug off things that to others would be hurtful. And you don’t understand why others can’t do the same because, it really is just words.

You fail to consider that other people aren’t like you. You keep saying something similar to You shouldn’t feel this way instead of acknowledging that they do. Maybe their psyches are different from yours. Maybe they have insights that you don’t. Maybe some of them have been victims in their lifetimes and need to be encouraged to talk about it. Not everyone has led a “Fenris” kind of life, you know. Maybe they shouldn’t be shamed for using the word victim.

Maybe if someone tells me off, she’s taking the first steps in telling off the real culprit in her life. Who knows?

All I know for sure in this particular post is that your experience of message boards is not necessarily how others experience message boards.

51

Fair enough, Zoe…but the difference is that I’m not trying to change how others experience message boards by lobbying for new rules. Live and let live. If Lib doesn’t want to participate in snarking after banning he’s free not to. And I should be free to do so if I choose.

The debate is about banned posters after all. If they’re banned, they’re banned for a reason and the vast majority of the time, it’s because they’re (usually intentionally) pissing off a number of posters. You have to work to get banned here as a rule. It’s not like the mods randomly throw a dart at a list of posters and ban one. A public mocking for those who worked so hard at disrupting the community that the mods finally banned them isn’t the end of the world.

My major disagreement with your post though is this: “Maybe they shouldn’t be shamed for using the word victim.”

Sorry, but I firmly disagree. There are real victims out there. It does a huge disservice to them to pretend that an abused child or the victim of rape, or a person tied up and beaten with sticks is the same as a banned poster on a message board who can switch to a different thread or read a different forum is way over the top. It’s insulting to real victims and diminishes their experiences.

I dislike it when people diminish the term “rape” (as in “Man, I ordered a dozen donuts and they only gave me 11. Those bastards raped me”) and “Nazi” for the same reason* as I dislike diminishing the real term “victim” to mean someone who is insulted in one thread on one board on the entire internet that lasts for no more than a week or so.

Finally, please note that Lib’s Law would only censor people who want to snark on a banned poster. He’s not talking about pittings in general.

Does being at the bottom of a pile-on suck? Yeah, I’m sure it does. Does being banned suck? I suppose it does. Would the two of them together so you can’t respond suck more? Yeah, probably. The solution? Don’t get banned.

I don’t care that he feels like I’m doing the moral equivalent of beating nuns with razor-wire (or whatever over-the-top hysterical analogy he spews next) if I participate in a pile-on after a poster’s banned, I don’t care if he puts one of his smarmy “It is unseemly…” messages in the thread. I do care that he’s trying to get another his peculiar little phobias enshrined as a hard-and-fast rule. Again.
*Heh–and note that if I was following Lib’s modus operandi, I’d be clamoring for the mods to ban the use of those terms except in the clinical sense, rather than simply speaking out against them and trying to persuade my fellow Dopers, or deciding my dislike of them was my problem.

52

:: shakes fist ::

Curse you xash! CURSE YOU*!!! :stuck_out_tongue:

*I had one all set to go, dammit! :smiley:

53

Carol Stream tends to post things that make sense to only herself and gets all huffy when asked for clarification. If the incoherency is deliberate, it is tantamount to trolling.

54

Ignore my previous post, I was thinking of someone else. :smack:

55

Please, folks: this thread is supposed to be about Gfactor’s moderating decision, not about Carol Stream as a poster or as a person. If you want to talk about Carol, the Pit is the more appropriate place. If you want to talk about Gfactor’s decision, that’s fine here. If you want to talk about trolling in general, that’s fine here too.

Yes, the three topics are somewhat interrelated, but … gratuitous comments about another poster really have no place in this thread.

56

Here is how I see it:

  1. There’s no need for some sort of normative “rule” on this. I’m not going to take action against someone just for starting or posting in a thread about somebody who is gone.

  2. I’ve tried to consider thest things on a case-by-case basis.

  3. I don’t think I’ve yet addressed a pitting of a banned poster. I can see arguments both ways, but in any case I see that as different from temporary banishment from a single forum or even a suspension or a voluntary departure from the Dope.

57

Fenris, I agree with you that there should be no rule against the discussion of banned posters. And I think that you will agree that I can practice non-defensiveness by choice. My main point to you is that you can can argue all day about whether words should be damaging to people, but the fact remains that to some people THEY ARE.

I was an abused child. I was abused sexually, physically, and psychologically – all by the same person. She is still alive and still has a personality disorder. It is easier to handle now that she has dementia. The psychological abuse has by far been the most damaging. I don’t know if she was responsible for the loss of almost half of my vision, but there is evidence that she may have been although that was an indirect result and not deliberate. But that is insignificant compared to how her words – or her silences – shaped me.

There are some people on message boards who have already been through what I have been through or something similar. Or maybe they have a mental illness that affects their perception. Or maybe they are going through a gruellung period of clinal depression which distorts reality and makes everything seem to be of earth-shaking importance. Or maybe all of this is happening at once. I can assure you, Fenris, that logical or not, for them, words can hurt. Psychological pain is real pain.

This is especially true of younger people who have not quite found their footing. This was my field of study at Vanderbilt and at the University of Tennessee.

About the time that I first came to the Straight Dope, there was some talk of another Message Board where some young person had just taken his own life. I think he did this using a web cam. No one paid much attention as he slowly burnt out.

Am I trying to censor you? Nope. But I have watched the shredding of a mentally ill person in a thread here. Either he was trolling or other posters were abusing the mentally ill. One way or the other, something was terribly wrong about that thread. It was very sick.

Emotionally intelligent people try to develop within themselves the way they think things “should” be without ever forgetting that for others, that’s just not the way things are.

Not everyone can be as wonderful as you and I are, Fenris.

58

Yes, please, I would like to talk about Gfactor’s decision. I checked with Xash, and was told I was clear to post about this.

Gfactor, I don’t think I “grok” (P.S. shoot me now for using that term) your definition of threadshitting, and junior modding, in the Pit. Can you elaborate, please?

Thanks much.

59

I’ll be glad to. I’m headed to Toledo for the day, so it’ll be later on tonight or even tomorrow before I get a chance, though.

60

Point of order.

Carol Stream is presently excluded from posting in the BBQ Pit, and a Pit thread about her has already been shuttered, with that being given as the reason. In light of these developments are we to assume that (for the time being) there is no appropriate forum for discussing her, and airing negative opinions?