Sounds like a fair and accurate representation of what must have happened.
I’ve patiently wait about an hour and thirty minutes for you to prove your statement. That’s plenty of time for you to get your facts together and post them. You have not done so here, nor have you PM’ed me with any proof. I’m justified in classifying your claim as false. You need to offer proof if you feel the need to build on your conspiracy theory.
If we decide not to burn people for their mental health and life problems, I have to say there are a few posters who are fighting substance abuse issues. They are always singled out and laughed at. When they are having a singular meltdown I want to feel for them. Not ridicule them. Alcoholism and addiction are real diseases. And, folks it is pervasive. It’s everywhere, in all walks of life including here on the Dope. I don’t like to see the poking fun at their expense. It’s hurtful.
The drunk in the corner is already in a bad place, they don’t need help falling further down the hole. That’s the end of my rant on this.
You don’t have to prove what is axiomatic.
But you still have to prove it’s axiomatic. I’ll wait.
Most people who live on Forums have many similarities, thus an example of one Cyber Citizen applies to many or most residents of Social Media.
Especially given the fact that many people call Social Media their second home.
LHoD outlined, in this thread, how the pus leaks over from that board to this one. The simplest, albeit probably temporary, solution would be for Giraffe, who still has considerable regard here, to shut down the “Behind Your Back” subforum at his board as a gesture of courtesy. Sure, the core contributors to that subforum can regroup elsewhere. That is up to them. Right now, there is a coterie of shit-stirrers who act with what appears to be the approval and support of a former mod at this board.
You obviously don’t know what axiomatic means. Look, the mods are not blind or dumb. So either they condone, ignore, or can’t do anything. But they aren’t unaware.
I’d call the snark mining trolling. Especially since so much of it is based on deliberate misrepresentation of the target, it’s persistent not just over a long period of time but also across multiple threads and in multiple forums (not just the Pit), and it’s designed to bait or provoke “flounces” or retaliatory behavior that results in the target being suspended or banned. You are going to have to wait on your formal proof which is a far higher standard than you folks demand before piling on.
Unfortunately the relationship between the boards may be far too incestuous to fix the problem. But that doesn’t mean that the problem doesn’t exist or cannot be pointed out.
I did a little searching because your anecdote screamed “more to the story” and sure enough, you left out the detail that you were encouraging snarking on a poster whose husband had just passed away. Like, days before the post was made. You were openly encouraging another poster to bump a decade old thread about said poster cheating on her husband, and telling them to say “is this the same husband that just died?”. You were piled on, and rightly so. This actually supports the point I was trying to make before, so thanks for that.
I’d like to bring this up to the Board level if possible, rather than at the Forum level, or is it accurate that anything at all is within bounds in the Pit? It was my impression, outside of the forbidden words, that some types of hate speech were also not allowed. I think there’s a clear difference between calling someone a “mentally deficient halfwit” as part of a Pit argument, and repeatedly jabbing them over abuse or health issues that they’ve discussed elsewhere on the Board. One is part of Dope culture. One is being a jerk at a minimum (and quite a bit worse in my opinion).
Should I start a different ATMB thread to discuss this? It would have consequences for moderation but I think it fits within existing rules.
Yes.
IOW: “But it’s cute when I do it!”
This stuff isn’t covered under The BBQ Pit rules at the top of the page?
There is a rule against harassment in the Pit:
Since I do not moderate the Pit, I have to admit that I am more than a little fuzzy on exactly what has historically been considered harassment in the Pit and what exactly normally falls under this rule and what does not.
There is also this:
And again, I have to admit that I don’t have much of a clue about what exactly falls under the category of civil or not with respect to how this rule has historically been enforced.
From the Pit forum rules, here:
Generally speaking, though, there aren’t many rules in the Pit. A lot of truly awful behavior has been allowed there over the years.
Are you suggesting I’ve ever snarked on a poster who recently lost a family member? Cite, please, if that’s indeed what you are suggesting. Either way, you missed the point. Did you even read my post?
Yep, I did some gross stuff while I was there. Encouraged by the general environment of the board, but still definitely gross. Good riddance to the whole thing.
I’m sure it was all very sincere.
Man, this brings me back to high school. As this drama going on and I’m sitting here totally oblivious.
Crazy, right? It’s almost as if people are capable of complex feelings towards a person.
Personally, I know many people for whom I don’t care, but if tragedy befalls them or a loved one, I am still inclined to have sympathy for them.
I really don’t see this whole “coordinated pile-on” that some are claiming.
If I post a link on this board to some external website, and others happen to go to it and visit and leave their input, do you consider that to be an elaborate strike?
Granted, the forum in question exists because of the SDMB, but there have been dissenting opinions from the proposed group-think. If those people end up abandoning the board, that’s on them, but to act like there’s some sort of herd mentality on that board, while discounting there’s something similar (or was) towards certain posters on this board, seems fairly disingenuous.
I’m suggesting a pattern of shit-talking over thousands of posts over a period of years does not put any of the “snarkers” in a position to claim the moral high ground.