Mischaracterised complaints?

[Revenant_Threshold]

In the Sarah Palin resignation threadcurrently in GD, there’s something of a ruckus, which I guess is to be expected. Anyway, at one point, tomndebb posts in response to Starving Artist;

[QUOTE=tomndebb]

[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
. . . the numerous citings of liberal hypocrisies that I post,. . . .
[/QUOTE]
I reacall three occasions when you made bold statements about such things, then noted that the [del]dog ate your homework[/del] computer swallowed your effort, but I don’t recall much more.

OTOH, that does not seem to be relevant to Governor Palin’s odd remarks over the last couple of days, so you might want to open a new thread to discuss them–or demonstrate a direct tie-in to the governor’s decision to abandon her post.
[/QUOTE]
In response, SA;
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
I reacall three occasions when you made bold statements about such things, then noted that the dog ate your homework computer swallowed your effort, but I don’t recall much more.
[/QUOTE]
And I recall an occasion when you accused me of behavior I had not been engaging in, and you refused to recant and apologize. Given that I was truthful in my comments whereas you weren’t, and given that you refused to recant and apologize because according to you I’d been mean to you in the past, I’d say the greater offense lies with you.

elucidator loves to tag me as a ‘conservative gadfly’ who delights in exposing the hypocrisies of the left. While he is certainly correct, that comment alone doesn’t prove the point. Just do a search with elucidator as the poster and ‘conservative gadfly’ as the keywords, and I’m sure you’ll find them.

But as has been shown with your accusations toward me before, you don’t like to engage in searches that prove you wrong, do you?
[/QUOTE]

To which is replied;
[QUOTE=tomndebb]

[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
And I recall an occasion when you accused me of behavior I had not been engaging in, and you refused to recant and apologize. Given that I was truthful in my comments whereas you weren’t, and given that you refused to recant and apologize because according to you I’d been mean to you in the past, I’d say the greater offense lies with you.
[/QUOTE]
Take your mischaracterized complaints about other posters to the Pit.
[/QUOTE]

I’m forced to agree with the point SA later makes - what he said needs to be taken Pit-ward, but what tomndebb said was fine?

I honestly cannot see a way in which Starving Artist’s post is inappropriate for GD while** tomndebb’s** isn’t. It seems rather an abuse of modly power to be able to impugne another poster’s reputation, then tell them that a response in kind should be taken elsewhere. Were it an escalation, maybe, but it doesn’t strike me as one in this case, and tomndebb’s characterisation of the offending post would seem to match his own one pretty well, too. Either both or neither should be unworthy for GD, but not one or the other.

If there’s a nuance i’m just not seeing, i’d be interested to know it, but as it stands I can’t see that this is fair.

[Starving_Artist]

It’s probably worth noting that a double standard seems to exist with regard to off-topic posts, as well.

Twice in that thread I was chastized (once by BMax, who is not a mod; and once by tomndebb, who is) for making off-topic comments, yet not a word of admonition was uttered to the two posters whose off-topic comments triggered my off-topic responses. To wit:

@RTFirefly

We libruls want to enact universal health care, bring global warming under control, and minimize the harm the current recession wreaks on people’s lives.

I then posted a response critical of universal health care, which brought the following response from BMax:

@BMax

…WTF does it have to do with the topic of this thread, Sarah Palin’s resignation?

And then in response to elucidator’s saying:

@elucidator

I got a feelilng, Starv, that if an asteroid slammed into the Earth, you would be down here pointing out how much its about liberal/lefty/Dem hypocrisy.

That, and how asteroid strikes were much more polite and civil in the 50s,

I responded that if elucidator had a more substantive way to rebut the numerous citings of liberal hypocrisies that I post, his defense would consist of more than asteroids and the championing of rudeness and incivility, which brought this admonition from tomndebb:

@tomndebb

that does not seem to be relevant to Governor Palin’s odd remarks over the last couple of days, so you might want to open a new thread to discuss them–or demonstrate a direct tie-in to the governor’s decision to abandon her post.

So, why is it that RTFirefly and elucidator drew no grief for their off-topic posts, but mine, which were merely in response to theirs, are deemed verbotten?

I think we all know the answer, and hypocrisy is its name.

(And thanks, RT. I appreciate your honesty.)

[leander]

Frankly, I disagree with **Starving **on pretty much everything but he and other like-minded folks are not being given a fair shake in GD, and this is primarily due to tomndebb’s biases. Tom is an overactive and overeager mod who so clearly shows his biases whilst modding that I am surprised TPTB have not stepped in earlier. I don’t like what **Starving **and others like him have to say, but I think it sucks that Tom can insult them without consequence and can influence discussion to such an extent that it basically shuts down and ridicules their opinions.

This comes from someone left of Obama.

[tomndebb]

The issue was not that Starving Artist made an off-topic comment. That would have been ignored, just as most one-liners are ignored in these threads.

The point was that Starving Artist took an off-topic comment and turned it into a long screed that was a totoal hijack to the discussion.

If he wants to go on about the liberal blight on America, he is welcome to do so–in its own thread. He is not welcome to use a single off-the-cuff remark as a rationalization to excuse a deliberate hijack.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

You would really do well not to moderate perceived slights against you, Tom.

[Fenris]

@tomndebb

The issue was not that Starving Artist made an off-topic comment. That would have been ignored, just as most one-liners are ignored in these threads.

The point was that Starving Artist took an off-topic comment and turned it into a long screed that was a totoal hijack to the discussion.

If he wants to go on about the liberal blight on America, he is welcome to do so–in its own thread. He is not welcome to use a single off-the-cuff remark as a rationalization to excuse a deliberate hijack.

You use the phrase “deliberate hijack” a lot. Somehow it always means the person who’s responding to the off-topic comment, not the person who made the comment in the first place.

Artist was responding to Firefly. It’s an incredibly stupid decision to say that it’s ok for Firefly (or Elucidator in just about every GD thread I’ve read, or Der Trihs in every religous thread–less so recently) to make hijacks, and then warn others for responding to them.

If your sphincter gets so clenched about thread drift, then stop it at it’s source with the initial hijack, not the people rebutting the hijacks.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@tomndebb

The issue was not that Starving Artist made an off-topic comment. That would have been ignored, just as most one-liners are ignored in these threads.

The point was that Starving Artist took an off-topic comment and turned it into a long screed that was a totoal hijack to the discussion.

But your post that I quoted in which you tell him to take it to the Pit, you say that it’s the “mischaracterized complaints” that should be removed to the Pit. That seems to be a different issue than whatever off-topic comments or hijacking may also have been the case. Too, there’s a difference between being asked to take a hijack into a new thread, and take a specific type of comments into the Pit. One is saying “This would be acceptable, just not in this thread”, and the other is “Your words are not acceptable for GD (any other forums) full stop”. These are two different issues.

It seems somewhat unpleasant to me that you feel that an “off-the-cuff” little bit of mocking, followed by an entreaty that in fact following up the subject should be done in the Pit, is acceptable behaviour. It’s my opinion that, had you simply been another poster, if there were any mod action taken it would have been against both you and Starving Artist, but that’s obviously just an impression.

[tomndebb]

@Fenris

You use the phrase “deliberate hijack” a lot. Somehow it always means the person who’s responding to the off-topic comment, not the person who made the comment in the first place.

Artist was responding to Firefly. It’s an incredibly stupid decision to say that it’s ok for Firefly (or Elucidator in just about every GD thread I’ve read, or Der Trihs in every religous thread–less so recently) to make hijacks, and then warn others for responding to them.

If your sphincter gets so clenched about thread drift, then stop it at it’s source with the initial hijack, not the people rebutting the hijacks.

There are one-off comments that occur in every discussion.

When I find a one-liner that I recognize will spark some sort of hijack I address it. When a thread has a long trail weaving through it and the discussion is scattered, I am more likely to concentrate on the serious efforts to derail the thread. I even left Starving Artisit’s initial screed alone until he came back to make an issue of it after another poster laid out a one-line dismissal.

In that thread, for example, my direction to Starving Artist was one of three separate directions to knock off hijacks and both of the other two were aimed at one-liners.

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

There is often a fine line between an aside and a hijack, and there often is a clear distinction. Usually, however, a one-off comment isn’t a hijack until others start piling on that bandwagon. Otherwise, every joke, every aside, every “BTW” or “if you’re interested in this topic, you might also be interested in…” would be a “hijack.” They’re not. A “hijack” occurs when a major topic, that should be a thread by itself, has changed the direction of the thread.

[Starving_Artist]

@tomndebb

In that thread, for example, my direction to Starving Artist was one of three separate directions to knock off hijacks and both of the other two were aimed at one-liners.

Both of which, if memory serves, were issued after your declaration that my post was a hijack.

But nevermind that. Why should posters be allowed to post little earworms intended to influence peoples’ perceptions of conservatives/Republicans, and then be immune to rebuttal because the rebuttal would constitute a hijack? IMO, if insulting (and most often, untrue or inaccurate) off-topic comments are to be allowed, then responses sufficient to rebut them should also be allowed, even if more than one or two lines is necessary for the rebuttal…especially in a forum devoted to debate.

And then we have the first, and, in my opinion, most important issue, which is that you effectively and erroneously accused me of lying and cowardice when you said (with no provocation from me, I might add):

@tomndebb

I reacall three occasions when you made bold statements about such things, then noted that the [del]dog ate your homework[/del] computer swallowed your effort, but I don’t recall much more.

And then, when I responded to your insult by saying:

@Starving Artist

And I recall an occasion when you accused me of behavior I had not been engaging in, and you refused to recant and apologize. Given that I was truthful in my comments whereas you weren’t, and given that you refused to recant and apologize because according to you I’d been mean to you in the past, I’d say the greater offense lies with you.

You responded with:

@tomndebb

Take your mischaracterized complaints about other posters to the Pit.

Now you are hardly in a position to complain about others mischaracterizing complaints, as you have done that very thing simply by saying this. You know perfectly well the situation I’m referring to and I defy you to prove your assertion that my comments about you were mischaracterized.

And secondarily, as I asked upthread, why is it that you are free to insult me and then when I post a perfectly honest response that makes you look worse than you tried to make me look, I get told to take it to the Pit? (And besides, I thought moderator complaints were not to be taken to the Pit.)

So, what is it? You get to post untrue insults at will, and then by virtue of your modship, forbid any rebuttals?

That’s certainly how it looks to me. So how about an explanation as to why you get to post unprovoked insults (and potential hijacks, I might add) such as you did with me, and forbid responses in kind…and further, how about you cite proof that my comments about you were ‘mischaracterized’?

[Revenant_Threshold]

Yeah, i’d like to restate that really my concern is not with the potential hijacking, but as I said in the OP with SA being told to take his comments to the Pit. Not with his points being hijacking and so perhaps suitable for a different GD thread if he cared to make one, but that his comments were considered unsuitable for GD and only suitable for the Pit, in comparison to tomndebb’s comment which appears to be considered entirely acceptable.

The issue of there being a hijack is not one I made this thread to ask about - that’s certainly an issue that SA apparently feels is worth looking at, but I don’t want my problem with this seen as a question of possible hijacking double-standards. It’s a question of possible un-GD-worthy language double standards. If Starving Artist’s comment was inappropriate for GD, suitable for the Pit, then so was tomndebb’s. It’s unfair for a mod to make comments to which a response in kind is directed elsewhere.

[tomndebb]

@Starving_Artist

But nevermind that. Why should posters be allowed to post little earworms intended to influence peoples’ perceptions of conservatives/Republicans, and then be immune to rebuttal because the rebuttal would constitute a hijack?

They are not. Shodan, Clothahump, LonsomePolecat, Carol Stream, and others get the same leeway on one-liners that Elucidator, and others do. It only becomes an issue when someone–Left or Right–deicdes to make a big deal about it and hijack the thread. (I am always amused, (if sadly), when I get complaints from the Left and Right that I only favor the other side. It shows a striking example of selective reading or memory.)

@Starving_Artist

And then we have the first, and, in my opinion, most important issue, which is that you effectively and erroneously accused me of lying and cowardice . . .

Your interpretation of my words are not supported by your quotation. I have not accused you of lying or cowardice; I have simply noted, in response to your claim that you have provided evidence of bad “liberal” actions that you have on several notable occasions announced that you would provide evidence and then failed to do so. I have no idea why you reneged on your declarations but I have not attributed that failure either to lying or cowardice, either publicly or in my own mind.

[Starving_Artist]

My apologies, Revenant Threshold. At the time I made the second post to the thread I felt that the question of hijack double-standards fit with the question of insult double-standards. I see now how that post changed the focus of the thread away from your OP, and again, I do apologize.

[tomndebb]

@Revenant_Threshold

Yeah, i’d like to restate that really my concern is not with the potential hijacking, but as I said in the OP with SA being told to take his comments to the Pit. Not with his points being hijacking and so perhaps suitable for a different GD thread if he cared to make one, but that his comments were considered unsuitable for GD and only suitable for the Pit, in comparison to tomndebb’s comment which appears to be considered entirely acceptable.

Yeah, I was out of line with my added comment.

The reason that Starving Artist’s comment was directed to the Pit was that it was a personal attack and not a matter of discussion. Regardless of our history, I should not have provoked him with my comment, simply because I have found his recent statements a bit self-serving.

I had no right to do that.

I apologize to Starving Artist for dragging in my view of that history.

[Starving_Artist]

@tomndebb

I have no idea why you reneged on your declarations but I have not attributed that failure either to lying or cowardice, either publicly or in my own mind.

You are being dishonest times two even now. You know damn good and well that I ‘reneged’ on nothing. I composed long, involved and detailed responses to a couple of your epic TLDR posts, and then due to, IIRC, having a new laptop as opposed to my old desktop, two nights in a row or so, lost them by hitting the wrong buttons when I attempted to edit or preview them. You and a couple other of my long-term enemies around here chose to believe that I both lied about composing and then losing them, with the suggestion being that I was taking a cowardly way out of responding to your posts. And you are clearly lying about not attributing that so-called ‘failure’ to lying or cowardice, as is perfectly obvious by the way you phrased your reference to it ([del]dog at you homework[/del], etc.). If you didn’t mean that I was posting a phony excuse, why say that at all?

And again, would you kindly answer both Revenant Threshold and me as to why it’s all right for you to come into a thread unprovoked and insult me, and then (with an addition insult thrown in by calling my comments ‘mischaracterizations’) tell me to take my comments to the Pit?

I don’t really expect an answer as it’s typical of you to stonewall when you have clearly stepped on your dick, but who knows, maybe one of these days you’ll take the high road and do the right thing.

[Starving_Artist]

@tomndebb

The reason that Starving Artist’s comment was directed to the Pit was that it was a personal attack and not a matter of discussion.

And I submit that your alluding to a dog having eaten my homework/posts was a personal attack on me and not a matter of discussion.

And I thought mod complaints were verboten in the Pit.

[tomndebb]

@Starving_Artist

You and a couple other of my long-term enemies around here. . .

I only became an “enemy” after you began insulting me and calling me a liar, unprovoked, in multiple other threads. I have never expressed an opinion as to why you have failed to present all the “evidence” you promised, although I confess to having tweaked you for it in this thread.

Have a nice night.

[Starving_Artist]

I will.

After which I will check to see if you are still refusing to answer why it’s okay for you to insult me in the forum which you moderate, and then tell me to take it to the Pit when I insult you back.

And I don’t call people liars cavalierly. Whenever I’ve called you a liar, it was because you were lying.

So I’ll issue you another challenge to run away from, just like you did the last time I challenged you when you made false claims about me:

Post the instances where I wrongfully called you a liar and see if I can’t make the charges stick.

[BigT]

Post redacted. I think it would go better in it’s own thread.

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

MODERATOR INTEVENES:

This seems to me to have degenerated into accusations hurled at each other, between two or three posters only. Is there a topic left in here? or is this just a case of mutual finger-pointing? If there’s nothing substantive left to say, then please, don’t say anything. I think most of you have had your say, and I have no idea how (or whether) to try to sort this out.

The general topic here seems to me to be how moderators issue rulings, whether warnings or simply friendly reminders. There is a strong argument that these should be expressed as neutrally as possible; but so long as the moderators are human beings, that’s often very difficult. Especially when it tends to be the same persons, over and over again, and moderators get the feeling that we’re banging our heads against a wall. I think we’re all going to have to live with the fact that none of us are perfect, and that from time to time, moderators get exasperated. It would be nice if the reasons for that exasperation took some responsibility for their actions, but I guess I’m just dreaming.

I’m going to therefore rule on the OP: Yes, tomndeb, you shouldn’t have used the word “mischaracterized,” it would have been sufficient to say “take your complaints about other posters to the Pit.”