# Moderation of inappropriate sexual commentary **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [May 6, 2013, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626 "2013-05-06T15:55:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/441 "2013-05-07T16:46:00Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That is such a bad idea that Pandora herself would say “Even I wouldn’t open _that_ box!” How so? I’ve never understood the reluctance of mods to admit they’ve made a mistake. I can accept that the poor moderation in the pantsless pope hat protestor thread was simply a stumble as the mods adjust to new policy, but why would it kill anyone to admit it? ---
**Author:** ![Tequila\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a6a055/32.png) [@Tequila\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tequila_Party)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/442 "2013-05-07T16:46:39Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > Clearly, this is the end of the world. Worth repeating. ---
**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 7, 2013, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/443 "2013-05-07T16:50:53Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > How so? I’ve never understood the reluctance of mods to admit they’ve made a mistake. I can accept that the poor moderation in the pantsless pope hat protestor thread was simply a stumble as the mods adjust to new policy, but why would it kill anyone to admit it? Because it would lead to others wanting re-rulings on previous judgments because rules have been refined, changed or eliminated, and I think the mods have a tough enough job with current rulings without having to make retroactive corrections going back ghod knows how far. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/444 "2013-05-07T16:57:37Z")
> [@Bob Ducca](#): > > Careful Drew, your t-shirt is one “R” away from being a mod-able offense. I don’t get it… are you saying a Republican would be treated differently? 😃 Question: In the Cafe Society when discussing Mad Men could we agree that 1960’s standards should be in effect? Seriously, does someone get extra leeway when talking about Joan’s particular assets? ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/445 "2013-05-07T16:58:36Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Because it would lead to others wanting re-rulings on previous judgments because rules have been refined, changed or eliminated, and I think the mods have a tough enough job with current rulings without having to make retroactive corrections going back ghod knows how far. God forbid anyone should ever review a decision, no matter how bad it appears in hindsight. I get that Armando Galarraga will never get his perfect game, but at least Jim Joyce had the decency to admit he fucked up. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/446 "2013-05-07T17:00:23Z")
[Modding] > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I’ll let you try out the analogies yourself, so that I don’t confuse Hentor any more than he already is I’m not going to go back and review the probably 12 posts from last night where other posters went right back to this kind of nonsense- but knock it off. [/Modding] > [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > How so? I’ve never understood the reluctance of mods to admit they’ve made a mistake. We do admit when we feel we’ve made mistakes. We don’t do it on cue, though. 😉 ---
**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 7, 2013, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/447 "2013-05-07T17:06:15Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > [Modding] > I’m not going to go back and review the probably 12 posts from last night where other posters went right back to this kind of nonsense- but knock it off. > > [/Modding] Assuming that applies to **everyone’s** analysis of an analogy from 9 pages ago, fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/448 "2013-05-07T17:09:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Because it would lead to others wanting re-rulings on previous judgments because rules have been refined, changed or eliminated, and I think the mods have a tough enough job with current rulings without having to make retroactive corrections going back ghod knows how far. It’s really not all that tough to say “Hey, before we had these rules, we decided x, y, z. We’re not retroactively changing that so don’t even ask, but to help clarify things, under these new rules, x and y would be ok going forward, but z is still not allowed.” This is done all the time in the real world by anyone with any sort of management experience. ("Hey, we said “Cell phones aren’t allowed at work and punished person X for violating that rule. We’ve since reconsidered and as long as cell phones are on “vibrate” or “silent”, it’s ok to have them at work starting now.”) Honestly, not that hard. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/449 "2013-05-07T17:10:52Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > Let’s see… > I think that post would (and should) be modded according to the new rules. It’s a gratuitous sexual comment in a serious, non-sexual thread - it falls smack dab in the middle of criterion 2. Not that you’re a mod, but if so, that’s sad. It’s a somewhat clever play(not upto his usual standard, but still moderately funny) on the thread title, and there’s nothing particularly sexual about it either. Nor do I think it can necessarily be construed as “Being a jerk”. It really is a pity that people want to be protected from stuff like this. ---
**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 7, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/450 "2013-05-07T17:18:20Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > It’s really not all that tough to say “Hey, before we had these rules, we decided x, y, z. We’re not retroactively changing that so don’t even ask, but to help clarify things, under these new rules, x and y would be ok going forward, but z is still not allowed.” > > This is done all the time in the real world by anyone with any sort of management experience. ("Hey, we said “Cell phones aren’t allowed at work and punished person X for violating that rule. We’ve since reconsidered and as long as cell phones are on “vibrate” or “silent”, it’s ok to have them at work starting now.”) > > Honestly, not that hard. Honestly, to be fair they would have to put that notice on all threads effected to date, and to be consistent they would have to use this standard for every rule modification, change or elimination and the threads that _they_ effected. Also, some posters _would_ demand retractions of any mod notes and/or penalties received, and a simple mod note stating that it just isn’t possible isn’t going to stop the mini-shitstorm threads from occurring in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![Missy2U](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3bc359/32.png) [@Missy2U](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Missy2U)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/451 "2013-05-07T17:21:00Z")
> [@DiosaBellissima](#): > > I think that is a fair approach to the situation that will make a tremendous positive change for the board. Thanks, mods. 100% agree. Thanks, mods! ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/452 "2013-05-07T17:23:55Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > Not that you’re a mod, but if so, that’s sad. It’s a somewhat clever play(not upto his usual standard, but still moderately funny) on the thread title, and there’s nothing particularly sexual about it either. Nor do I think it can necessarily be construed as “Being a jerk”. It really is a pity that people want to be protected from stuff like this. We just disagree, I guess. It’s really a pity that some people need explicit rules to prevent them from doing stuff like this. (not a comment on **VT** - I’m generally a big fan of his posts, but everyone hits a bum note every once in a while) ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/453 "2013-05-07T17:30:20Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Honestly, to be fair they would have to put that notice on all threads effected to date, and to be consistent they would have to use this standard for every rule modification, change or elimination and the threads that _they_ effected. Also, some posters _would_ demand retractions of any mod notes and/or penalties received, and a simple mod note stating that it just isn’t possible isn’t going to stop the mini-shitstorm threads from occurring in this forum. Put what notice on all threads? I never mentioned a notice. I’m talking about clarifying new rules in light of old rulings. Note that this is _exactly_ what Ellen did earlier on when she essentially said “Ok, this was a thread that prompted this new ruling–let’s look and see how the new ruling would have affected it had it been in force at the time.” I hate the conclusion she came to–that under the new rules, mocking PopeHatGirl would still be forbidden–but I absolutely applaud her for breaking the moronic SDMB tradition of not giving concrete examples and going on the “See if you can guess when you cross the invisible line. Just go ahead. Guess.” ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/454 "2013-05-07T17:37:36Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Honestly, to be fair they would have to put that notice on all threads effected to date, and to be consistent they would have to use this standard for every rule modification, change or elimination and the threads that _they_ effected. Also, some posters _would_ demand retractions of any mod notes and/or penalties received, and a simple mod note stating that it just isn’t possible isn’t going to stop the mini-shitstorm threads from occurring in this forum. So, it’s better to stonewall? I don’t agree, and neither do at least some of the real mods, who are willing to reconsider bad decisions. ISTM that those who refuse to do so are less effective as mods, at least in the eyes of the more reasonable Dopers. Regards, Shodan ---
**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 7, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/455 "2013-05-07T17:40:56Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Put what notice on all threads? I never mentioned a notice. I’m talking about clarifying new rules in light of old rulings." And I was originally responding to a specific post from **Shodan** -did you read it? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/456 "2013-05-07T17:52:03Z")
Looking at it again, I clearly misread it. You’re right–going back and labeling old thread rulings as null-and-void would be a colossal pain in the ass. I agree with you . ---
**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 7, 2013, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/457 "2013-05-07T17:53:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > So, it’s better to stonewall? I don’t agree, and neither do at least some of the real mods, who are willing to reconsider bad decisions. > > ISTM that those who refuse to do so are less effective as mods, at least in the eyes of the more reasonable Dopers. > > Regards, > Shodan So you are deciding which are the “real mods”, and you are counting yourself as among “the more reasonable Dopers”? ---
**Author:** ![MegaBee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f0a364/32.png) [@MegaBee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MegaBee)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/458 "2013-05-07T17:54:11Z")
This is a good change, Mods. Thank you. ---
**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 7, 2013, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/459 "2013-05-07T17:54:18Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Looking at it again, I clearly misread it. You’re right–going back and labeling old thread rulings as null-and-void would be a colossal pain in the ass. I agree with you . I thought it was just a misread-no prob. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2013, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626/460 "2013-05-07T17:57:44Z")
> [@DiosaBellissima](#): > > I can’t dig up links at the moment, but in at least one or two of the monster threads, I posted many of the same links that you’re referring to. I also recall a few others doing the same. > > Ding ding ding, this is totally what I was talking about. And I’m sorry, you guys _are_ often joking about sexual assault. That’s whole damned problem here. It’s genuinely astonishing to me that some of you are so voraciously trying to defend otherwise. > > But for clarity’s sake: joking about sexual assault doesn’t a rapist make. I’m not calling you a rapist or someone who wants to sexually assault someone. You are, however, making _jokes_ about sexual assault. That’s the whole point. I gotta ask for it. Cite? I want to understand what your idea of sexual assault is. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-inappropriate-sexual-commentary/657626.md?page=24)