Lynn B - Improper Closing of newscrasher's thread

I think you should reconsider newscrasher’s tread closing. It was obvious that he wasn’t commenting on any of the individual stories, but on the fact that one can watch 4 separate news stations and only the same 1/2 dozen or so stories repeated ad nauseum. It was a pit of the homogenous nature of our main infotainment sources.

I didn’t read his thread that way, though on re-reading it, I can see where you’re coming from. It’s certainly a valid complaint, and a valid pitting, if not the clearest way to say it. If newcrasher confirms that this is his complaint, I think it should be reopened.

Nah, let him rewrite it so that we don’t have to be inordinately perceptive to figure out why it isn’t just some random crap he chose to dump into the pit.


Given that it’s not the first time he’s shown up, given facile one-sentence summaries of current news stories, and then pulled a “hit-and-run OP” with them, I personally think that Lynn was under no obligation to attribute a particular motive to him, but rather well within her rights to do a lockdown.

In case you haven’t tried going back to the BBQ page and scrolling down a couple of lines.

Sorry, Contra, my cerebral flatulence; thanks Lute. Polycarp, I don’t recognize any posting pattern of newscrasher, so I’ll take your work for it. I was reading that OP in a vacuum. Squink, I don’t feel a SDMB poster has to write to the lowest common denominator; however, if the OP of the original thread does have a pattern of obtuse posting, I can understand the closing.

w\What the fuck are you talking about?

For the record, I had not seen this thread when I posted my own OP protesting the closing.

Gratuitous smartass tone duly noted. Now I’ll have to add requesting a link the the List of Things Not To Do Lest Lute Get All Pantytwisted.

Hmmm. Somehow, like newcrasher, I missed the existence of this thread.

As I noted in the other complaint thread, I don’t see this at all. He noted the stories, but not the fact that they’re repeated ad nauseum.

Anyway, maybe if someone asks nicely the thread could be re-opened – with perhaps an explanation from someone as to what the actual point is.

I can understand that maybe it didn’t sound pitty or it was too vague. If that is the case, why not just move it to MPSIMS? I also don’t understand the comment that it was on the wrong board?

I think it was a case of “itchy trigger finger” as newscrasher called it in his own thread. The intent of the OP wasn’t obvious; Lynn was having a bad day; and the mods have the power to make snap decisions without consequences.

A difficulty with an online medium is tone. The reader applies his or her own tone to a post, which quite often isn’t the poster’s tone. In conversation, I would have pretty much said things the way newscrasher did. I would expect my audience to make the leap in reasoning, based not just on the words but on the delivery. That’s harder to do in a printed medium, but as a constant user of sarcasm, I spotted it in nc’s OP right away. I have found that there is a sizable minority of the SDMB who fail to recognize sarcasm, even in less nuanced forms than nc’s. This isn’t a personal indictment, Ponder; I really can’t ‘name names’ as I don’t pay attention. It’s just a general observation from my sarcastic postings.

Sarcasm my ass. His locked OP said nothing. No comment worthy of discussion, no observation, no rant. No value added. If he’s got something to say, he needs to do a better job of saying it.

Except that I read it, understood the rant, and agreed with the rant. It said something; it just wasn’t there, on the page, in black and white.

I can’t speak for Lynn, but before seeing her response and closure, I myself was planning to close the thread myself. The OP had no real content, and if newcrasher had intended to make some commentary about the national news – well, he should have made it rather than saving it for later or waiting for other posters to do so. Stating an observation does not make a Pit thread, and frankly we already had threads about most of the individual news topics newcrasher mentioned.

So, **Lynn ** chose to close an obscure thread that was not even a proper pit thread. Instead of protesting it, I think newcrasher could put in energy into starting a new thread, with a more obvious point and put it in an appropriate forum.

I read the closed Op before I saw this pit thread thread, and while **Lynn ** could re-open it, it would be just as easy for the new thread to be created.


That right there is what the problem is. Isn’t one of the expectations of this board that what you want to say will be there, on the page, in black and white?

Hell, I already did it for him (in a now closed thread), using his own words (well, two of mine.):

True, it’s probably more MPSIMSy, rather than Pit material, but I’m pretty sure it’s a valid thread that would stay open, since it has, you know, a point.

Watchoo think, fluiddruid, would this tiny change have made it acceptable?