Whoosh.
Of course I don’t feel compelled to disengage my brain and come to their aid in ways that cause more harm than good, but as most reasonable people would define it I have indeed been known to come to the aid of newbies, with no whoosh to be found in any context.
Twice. Wow.
Nope, the first one was a genuine whoosh because I was bouncing around threads on my iPod and not really stopping to think about what was being said too closely. After the whoosh comment I got it and responded to the first post in code. Looks like the whoosh is on you for the second one.
Because it’s difficult or impossible for us to confirm the content, yes. That’s an issue with messages between third parties. It’s not an issue when people send insulting messages directly to us, which is what happened here.
I disagree. And yet again, I don’t accept this excuse no matter how many times it’s trotted out. We’ve had plenty of people object very strongly to warnings without abusing the mods. We’ve made difficult calls, borderline calls, and wrong calls without people cursing us out. I’ll accept responsibility for making mistakes, but I don’t accept this nonsense about being responsible for someone else’s overreaction. Even if you believe twickster did something wrong, I remind you that I got the same kind of response for warning mhendo for threadshitting a week ago and that was a no-doubt warning. If someone thinks it’s OK to curse out or insult the mods repeatedly by posts and private messages, that’s their responsibility.
Somebody made the sports analogy earlier, but I think it bears repeating. You shove a ref, you get ejected. You drop an F-bomb-laden, abusive message on the mods, you get the hook. What’s so hard to understand?
Several posters have asserted the gist being a lack of consistency but I agree with Starving Artist. That the real bottom line problem (if there is a problem) is subjectivity.
There will never be consistency and can never be. How can it be possible to be consistent when weighing every single comment, deciding every single post that might go “too far” on a board where sarcasm and a large degree of snark is so rampantly commonplace?
Even old Cecil himself often presents his information and material in this style.
There will always be some degree of dissatisfaction, differing personal interpretations - opinions stemming from biases for or against certain posters - but also simply because what one person may find offensive, another may not. It’s just that simple in that is is complicated.
We could firehose the place with lysol and listerine, stuff every buccal cavity in sight with bars of soap. But there would not be perfect harmony. Perfect harmony would be boring, I sure hope we never have perfect harmony. ~puts on blindfold, begins poking recklessly and swinging wildly at moderator and poster pinatas~
…are you able to explain why no one was warned in the Snowboarder Bo thread: and can you explain exactly why what mhendo said (in thread, not in PM) crossed the line but those in the Bo thread didn’t? Links for the thread were given by me up thread. Cheers.
I see a lot of negative comments about Snowboarder Bo’s catchphrase and not too many that are actually insulting of the poster. That’s all I’m going to say about it. Don’t take it personally, but I’m not interested in using this thread to argue about an unrelated issue that happened months ago.
Seriously, this thread has run it’s course. Given the POT comment was excused by the mods, I think the warning was weak, however, telling a mod to FO paints a different picture. Try telling the ref to FO in a football or baseball game and see if you don’t get tossed from the game quick, fast and in a hurry.
Bah. The mod came in a whole day after the incident. Multiple mods have said they don’t like issueing late calls. Water under the bridge and all.
This should be common knowledge by now. **twickster **herself said in the warning:
One way to cut down on the arbitrariness is to cut out Mod Notes for actual infractions. No more “Now now, you know better.” Swing the Warnings much earlier and much swifter. Yeah, that’ll improve things.
Let’s just cut to the end and make all Warnings computerized. Cut out the human factor completely. For that matter, we can probably replace all the posters with computerized simulations as well. That way nothing can ever go wrogn.
That’s too complicated. I say everytime a post is made a warning is issued. Starting after this one.
Good idea.
Oh crap.
Reported!
But sarcasm and snark aren’t commonplace anymore, hence mhendo’s warning. Most of the sarcasm and snark I’ve seen is directed outward (pop culture, politicians, etc.), not at posts or posters. That makes this a nice place to hang out if you don’t want your feelings hurt, but it’s also kinda stifling.
I’ve reported this warnable offense.
And in the beauty of effeciency I’ve reported mine as well.
Agree. I think they’re putting too much workload on the mods trying to enforce some quaint notion of decorum. I don’t have a problem with mod interpretations; I have a problem with the increasingly irrelevant Ed Zotti putting them in such a ridiculously untenable position.
I honestly don’t know what you are talking about An Arky. The written word has never handled sarcasm well. And I read lots of snark in the Pit, Elections and Great Debates. I don’t frequent MPSIMS, but AFAIK that venue has always suppose to have been a little “Nicer” than the others. I can’t say you’re wrong, since I’m not sure what you are referring to. Seriously, has their been an anti-snark codicil tacked on anywhere?
It seems to me that Great Debates is plenty rough. If the mods wanted to tighten that ship up, I could adapt, just as I and others handled GQ after manhattan stepped down and samclem ordered the deck swabbed down.
I hope we’re not just re-hashing the speech restrictions in the pit.