# Marley--here we go again. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [May 14, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321 "2013-05-14T16:00:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/61 "2013-05-14T20:36:40Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I refuse to fight with one hand tied behind my back. If lefties can snipe at me, then I can give it back. That’s only fair. This seems like a perfectly sensible plan that can only lead to good things for you. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/62 "2013-05-14T20:37:13Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Would you say **Qin Shi Huangdi** and **WillFarnaby** are liberals? > > These are substantive comments, in your view? I don’t know much about **WillFarnaby**. I have nothing to say about **Qin Shi Huangdi** that can be said in this forum. As for those quotes you cherry picked…in most cases they either preceded or followed substantive comments on the merits of the various proposals. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/63 "2013-05-14T20:38:41Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I refuse to fight with one hand tied behind my back. If lefties can snipe at me, then I can give it back. That’s only fair. I wish we didn’t return to this analogy so often. These are discussion forums, not a duel with pistols or the schoolyard at recess. And nobody was fighting you in the first place; you were just sniping at other people. > [@Oakminster](#): > > I don’t know much about **WillFarnaby**. I have nothing to say about **Qin Shi Huangdi** that can be said in this forum. Would you say either of them are liberals? (For those playing at home: they are nothing of the kind, which is obvious if you read their posts in that thread or pretty much any politics thread they post in.) > [@](#): > > As for those quotes you cherry picked…in most cases they either preceded or followed substantive comments on the merits of the various proposals. I asked you about these quotes specifically. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/64 "2013-05-14T20:39:36Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I don’t know much about **WillFarnaby**. I have nothing to say about **Qin Shi Huangdi** that can be said in this forum. > > As for those quotes you cherry picked…in most cases they either preceded or followed substantive comments on the merits of the various proposals. For example? ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/65 "2013-05-14T20:44:57Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > In a thread that’s chok a blok full of unconstitutional ideas, pointing out the fact that some are currently unconstitutional is not “reasoned critique”. Yep. It was clearly an exercise in building castles in the air and not a serious proposal to rework the government. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/66 "2013-05-14T20:54:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I wish we didn’t return to this analogy so often. These are discussion forums, not a duel with pistols or the schoolyard at recess. And nobody was fighting you in the first place; you were just sniping at other people. > > Would you say either of them are liberals? (For those playing at home: they are nothing of the kind, which is obvious if you read their posts in that thread or pretty much any politics thread they post in.) Right, and that’s why you have to give WillFarnaby so many mod notes, the same number Oakminster gets, right? Oh, wait, I just remembered something: despite Will’s radical right view (his most recent thread proposes that taxes are the same thing as extortion), I don’t remember ever seeing him get a mod note. At this point, I can see two possibilities: 1. He’s therefore no true conservative, since no true conservative fails to get mod notes from Marley; or 2. There’s some other difference between Oak and Will that leads to the former running afoul of the mods and not the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/67 "2013-05-14T21:00:49Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Marley said wandering into, not heading towards. Which I disagree that Oak was, in either sense. > > Into. Not, nearby. Not in the vague direction of. Into. Whatever Marley’s intention, “into” can reasonably be interpreted as saying that Oakminster has passed into threadshitland. No, “passed into” would be past tense (“have wandered into”), not present (“are wandering into”). ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/68 "2013-05-14T21:13:27Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > No, “passed into” would be past tense (“have wandered into”), not present (“are wandering into”). “Are wandering into” can be reasonably interpreted as “you are now passing over the border [into Threadshitland].” ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/69 "2013-05-14T21:23:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > What idea was restricted here? it was a mod note for tone. Chilling effect. > [@](#): > > It wouldn’t get a second glance in the Pit, but I think you’re working backward here. Sure, that’s true, but so what? Pit standards are not in question and have no bearing here. “Boo, hiss” is obviously too mild for the Pit. What, are you suggesting that Oak should open a Pit thread just to say, “Boo, hiss”? Gimme a break. It’s fine in Elections, where it belongs. It doesn’t break any rules. It’s not insulting someone, and, I’m sorry, saying Oak was on the path in any sense to being a jerk just strikes me as silly. Really, what bugs me the most is giving ammunition to the accusation that the moderation here is biased against conservatives. Obviously such a concern should not stop you from moderating on actual rules offenses. But Oak broke no rules, and thus should not have received moderation, even in note form. And it does have a chilling effect; I for one am not going to join in on that thread _now_… ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/70 "2013-05-14T21:24:12Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > “Are wandering into” can be reasonably interpreted as “you are now passing over the border [into Threadshitland].” That’s still present tense (“on the border” vs. “crossed the border” or “passed over the border”). ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/71 "2013-05-14T21:28:01Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > That’s still present tense (“on the border” vs. “passed over the border”). “Passing over the border” means you have now earned a violation as a trespasser. Present tense. But, whatever, dude. This semantic debate is pointless; I think Marley is wrong regardless of his intended meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/72 "2013-05-14T21:30:24Z")
I suspect that if **Marley** had inteded to say that **Oak** crossed a border, he would have used those exact words. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/73 "2013-05-14T21:34:34Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Chilling effect. On what? > [@](#): > > Sure, that’s true, but so what? Pit standards are not in question and have no bearing here. Because you asked where those comments belongs if not Elections, which is a backward question: the issue is whether the post is appropriate for the forum, not which forum the post (having already been made) most belongs in. > [@](#): > > “Boo, hiss” is obviously too mild for the Pit. There’s no such thing as too mild for the Pit. Insults and profanity are allowed in the Pit and they’re fun, but they’re not mandatory. > [@](#): > > What, are you suggesting that Oak should open a Pit thread just to say, “Boo, hiss”? Gimme a break. I don’t care if he actually starts a Pit thread. I’m saying if he literally wants to boo and hiss at people’s ideas and make personal challenges like ‘you do remember Con Law?’ and ‘don’t you teach civics?’ he should do it in the Pit. If he wants to argue against various proposals on their merits or say they violate the Constitution for whichever reasons are applicable, he can do so in Elections in a civil manner and it’ll make for a better thread. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/74 "2013-05-14T21:38:59Z")
Better thread, perhaps, but still an example of unnecessary moderation. You’re not here to make sure we put sincere thought and effort into our arguments. You’re here to make sure we don’t break the rules. If that has changed, than my use of the word “appalling” is apt. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/75 "2013-05-14T21:44:44Z")
That’s exactly what he did though: made sure no one broke the rules. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/76 "2013-05-14T21:45:48Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > You’re not here to make sure we put sincere thought and effort into our arguments. No, I’m not. But I’m allowed to tell posters that if they’re going to make the effort to post in a thread in the first place, they should post something constructive or on-topic instead of just heckling other people. I’ve done that before. In this instance I gave everything up through “First Amendment.” “First Amendment.” a pass because even though that was pointless in context, it demonstrated a bare minimum of thought (literally) regarding something someone else had said. Some of the other comments didn’t even reach that minimum standard. So I told **Oakminster** that if he was going to continue posting to the thread, he should post something reasoned and rather than literally booing at people. > [@](#): > > You’re here to make sure we don’t break the rules. The rule here is “don’t be a jerk.” If you don’t think booing at people in the middle of a conversation sounds like the kind of thing a jerk does, I think we’ll have to chalk that up to a difference of opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/77 "2013-05-14T21:46:01Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > That’s exactly what he did though: made sure no one broke the rules. He issued a mod note when no rules had been broken, or even slightly bent. I don’t think that’s a good use of moderation. > [@Marley23](#): > > The rule here is “don’t be a jerk.” If you don’t think booing at people in the middle of a conversation sounds like the kind of thing a jerk does, I think we’ll have to chalk that up to a difference of opinion. I guess so. But if you thought Oak was actually, in fact, being a jerk, then he should have received a warning. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/78 "2013-05-14T21:48:33Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > He issued a mod note when no rules had been broken, or even slightly bent. I don’t think that’s a good use of moderation. So you think mods shouldn’t speak up until after a rule is broken? No notes-just Official Warnings? ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/79 "2013-05-14T21:51:30Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So you think mods shouldn’t speak up until after a rule is broken? No notes-just Official Warnings? I wouldn’t go that far, it’s really that I just feel that Oak’s posts did not warrant a mod note. I think with such things the mods would be better off, and the board a better, more interesting place, if mods erred more on the side of not intervening without clearer provocation. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321/80 "2013-05-14T21:54:16Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > I guess so. But if you thought Oak was actually, in fact, being a jerk, then he should have received a warning. You seem to have excluded the middle here. I saw some behavior that was borderline and issued a note to head off possible worse behavior. Again, that’s pretty standard. I’d much rather give a note to steer a conversation or a poster away from some iffy behavior than leave it alone and have to warn the poster (or warn two posters, or give several “angry” mod notes) later on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/marley-here-we-go-again/658321.md?page=5)