I know some people find us intolerably abusive, but in my six years here that’s not the case. If you feel insulted, show me where I insulted you.
But can’t Marley’s posts be perfectly polite yet still be 100% wrong? (Not all of them, of course, but his batting average does seem to be in a major slump just now).
The criticism, if you’ll review DudleyGarrett’s contribution, is that I was rude.
That is where you went wrong. I have no problem with the action, although you would have been clearer if you quoted the actual hijack not the joke. But to say it in that way is condescending. Now that we can not effectively call you on such attitudes it would be best to have as neutral a tone as possible in your rulings.
Of course you can’t. You’re one of the most condescending, downright rude people I’ve ever interacted with on this board. You have absolutely no understanding or comprehension of what is ‘rude.’
And because this is the SDMB, here is my cite: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8164466&postcount=5
Actually, reading the threads you link, I don’t think they support a case for “**samclem **is rude” very well. Granted they’re all nominally Pittings of him, but a) some of their OPs specifically clarify that they’re more about clarifying something-or-other than complaining about samclem; b) more posters seem to chime in saying “no, that wasn’t especially rude, OP, so chill” than otherwise; and c) **samclem **himself comes off sounding reasonable, appropriate, and willing to listen to posters in those threads. Plus, they’re mostly old.
Absolutely what I was going to say, having wasted a fair bit of time reading the linked threads. If thy’re the best cites you can come up with, XJETGIRLX, I think they ‘prove’ the opposite of what you want them to
‘prove’.
Yeah, I get that. Dudley thought you were rude. My criticism is that while you manage to be polite nearly a third of the time, you make a lot of bad moderating decisions and simply aren’t very good at it. It may just be that you are in over your young head, I fear.****
But your recent “ATMBing” of Marley hardly helps your point, since he’s not the one looking silly in that thread, either. Get over yourselves, people.
One purpose of the new rules was to focus criticism on WHAT THE MODS DO and away from WHO THEY ARE (as people.) XJETGIRL, you are out of line here: personal insults directed at other posters are not (and never have been) permitted outside the Pit. This kind of comment can certainly still be made in the Pit, but NOT in ATMB.
See Oakminster’s OP for a fine example of how things should work. He’s criticizing what Marley did, he’s not calling him names.
The Great Debates forum has had this distinction for a long time, and there’s very little problem with it. In debate, you may criticize what someone says, but you may not insult them as people. In ATMB, you may criticize what the mods do; you may not criticize them as people.
A mod can make a bad call (although I don’t think that’s the case here), we’re only human. Making a bad call does not make us rude, douchebags, stupid, or whatever.
This is exactly how the new rule on criticism of mod calls is supposed to work. You think a mod makes a bad call; you explain and explain why; the mod can respond – by defending the call, by admitting error and reversing a decision, whatever. And it’s done in a spirit of getting something accomplished (correcting bad decisions) rather than just venting spleen. Back in the Old Pit, you would certainly have been able to call the mod vicious names, attack his/her parentage, and so forth. Frankly, some mods (like me) would usually not read it; and few of us would have responded by reconsidering our actions.
Think of dealing with a child or a fellow employee or any other human being. You say, “It’s wrong to finger-paint on the walls.” You don’t say, “You’re a stupid fucker.” When the criticism is directed at a behavior, the person can correct that behavior. When the criticism is an insult, the person gets huffy and defensive and (more often than not) doesn’t respond to the criticism.