Please provide cites to support your opinion, particularly given that:
There is nothing what so ever prohibited about creative insults that are not abusive, not directed at any person, and not using profanity profanity,
There is a well established tradition of contests and playful one-upmanship on the SDMB, including vulgar subjects (e.g. TMI threads and numerous zit threads)
There is a well established tradition of creative insults in the SDMB Pit,
Out of concern that the rules not be violated in the future in other threads, the OP asked you to advise of any insults posted in the thread that would not be permitted to use against other posters.
Out of concern that there was no person actually being pitted, the OP asked you to consider moving the thread to MPSIMS.
Quite frankly, I expect you to moderate in accordance with the rules, rather that to claim rules that simply do not exist.
This seems like a good place to observe that Lynn’s approach of late seems misguided. If the goal is to convince us that the new rules are a guide toward civility and not to be enforced with a heavy-hand, then it might be wise to avoid heavy-handed enforcement in these early days
Indeed, there have been a few comments about rules which confused me. The OPs thread was one of them. I’ve noticed at least one thread was disappeared altogether, though it didn’t explicitly violate any of the rules I’m aware of. (Though I’m not surprised, given the subject matter.) I thought I knew what the rules here were, but now I’m not so sure. There’s a lot of confusion around here, and I think clearing it up will go a long way toward soothing all the savage beasts.
Perhaps Ed should have said “In most such cases we will close the thread altogether (or we may just tell the participants in a thread to cool off but that’s less likely)” in his FAQ, as that’s what appears to be happening. Will the heavy end of the hammer get any less heavy once the current tempest dies down?
No, she’s quite right. There just haven’t been any attempts at ‘creative insult’ threads in recent memory, but they did pop up regularly in the past and got knocked down just as quickly. They’re incredibly pointless threads that are too puerile even for MPSIMS.
I don’t agree with a lot of recent admin decisions, but this at least is one with precedent.
What’s funny is there’s an Anti-Shodan thread (Savior of the Pit), there’s an Anti-Kanicbird thread and there’s an anti-Bijou Drains thread and none of those have been closed, despite being clear rules violations.
And the mods are wasting their time closing down “joke” threads which don’t actually violate any rules.
I haven’t got a single atom of animosity toward Lynn Bodoni. She seems pretty reasonable to me.
But I was very disappointed when the thread in question was closed before I got a chance to contribute to it. It seemed to me to be a promising venue for doper wit and silliness, along the lines of a “tell outrageous lies about the person who posted before you” thread that attracted a large following a couple of years ago
To paraphrase Spinal Tap, there’s a fine line between puerile and playful; I think this thread could have danced around it in a manner that many of us would have found quite entertaining.
So I’m sad to hear about this rule, and would love to see it reconsidered.
I don’t intend to apply the new rules retroactively. Both of these threads were started before the new rules were posted, hence, they are far from “clear rules violations.”
Not every thread that should be locked down is. They usually have to be reported, or be obvious enough that the casual browsing moderator figures it out.
So they’re grandfather-claused in? New posts in those threads posted after these new rules that would otherwise be rule breaking in a new thread are acceptable?
New Pit rules apply to new posts (if the rule is one that deals with posts) and new threads (if the rule is one the deals with threads). I took your point to be that the thread titles themselves were clear rules violations. If there a specific post in either of those threads that you’re talking about, please report the post or PM me, and I’ll take a look after lunch. This thread is about another topic. I’d like to avoid hijacking it further with this discussion.
So let’s not have any more of this nonsense of “Contests to see who can come up with the most creative insults have never been allowed in any forum,” or assertions that if there are such threads it is because they flew under the mod’s radar.
What you call pointless and puerile,though, more people call fun. I’m guessing you’re not a fan of The Holy Grail- “Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!”
Wow, to think that one of the most beloved games in freakin’ Monty Python is now not allowed at the SD is pretty sad.
If Pythonesque insult game threads are so offensive, I very much doubt that you would have participated in the thread and moved it to an appropriate forum, whether you were aware of a prohibition or not. The simple fact of the matter, as confirmed by you actions, and as established by your precedent, is that anyone with a lick of common sense can see that an insult game thread is no more than harmless fun.
I would expect that all mods be made aware of any particular rules that run contrary to common sense so that when they come across threads that break those rules, they can take appropriate action despite their initial inclination being to use good sense.
Now that your precedent has been pointed out to Lynn, I trust that she will re-open the more recent insult game thread and move it to the proper forum, or take her concern to Ed for a review and explanation of precisely which rule was violated, with cites.