I’m not surprised you run away. Why? Because you basically agree with me. The issue arose due to that thread in MPSIMS. That is a fact. It is also a fact that that forum has been identified as one where these things are usually posted. People are free to post pretty much anywhere, but where you post will affect the responses you get. That’s another factPost the same OP in the Pit, General Questions and GD and you’ll wind up with three very different threads. Same with other fora. I think that MPSIMS and IMHO share the fuzziest line. But if I had something really serious to discuss I would not post it in a forum with Mundane and Pointless in it’s title.
Now, that said—and pay very close attention to this part—I’m not of the mind that any post about death notices or kid is sick or husband has cancer should generate snark and side jokes and hurdy durdy too? None. Can you understand that? It’s easy. It’s the part we agree on 100%. Where we disagree is whether we need another set of rules to prevent it. Would you agree with me that posting snark and side jokes and hurdy durdy in threads started about death notices or kid is sick or husband has cancer is completely Jerkish behavior? If so, we already have a rule for that. So, tell me, how would the new rules help? If you don’t agree that constitutes Jerkish behavior, that you’ll have to explain to me.
Cancer? No. But serious questions - including medical issues - do elicit that response. One of those was brought up a few times in earlier discussions of this issue: the OP of this thread posted a serious question, described in decidedly non-lascivious terms, about her breasts. That thread got to post 5 before there was a stupid comment.
Search for “boobs” in thread titles for more examples. In GQ, it’s the first response (admittedly not the best example, but c’mon - the first response in GQ?). Same thing for a thread about breast reduction surgery. Effects of weight loss on breasts? Post 6. Back pain and discomfort? Post 7… 9… 12, etc.. All those OPs asked honest, non-sexual, serious questions, and they all got Beavis and Butthead going, “huh huh… you said boobs.”
I know I’m going to regret this but: What is “the issue” that arose due to “that thread” in MPSIMS? You honestly think all of this is about one thread?
And yes, I’m free to post in Great Debates about my boobs having a lump during my period and hey ladies, do yours too? but they’ll move that post to IMHO so that little choo choo train of thought goes right of the rails there. I’m free to post it and you bet the answer will vary depending on where I do post it because it’ll get the answer “Forum change moving to IMHO”
I have been reading along with most of the threads that concern this issue, but I think I have only posted in one (the MOL trainwreck), and I somehow missed the bottom-naked Pope-condom protest thread, but I have been very interested in the issue and how its evolved over the last few months (silent majority / silent minority - who knows?).
A lot of the controversy has been honestly mystifying me. I have been seriously confused by what seemed to me to be such a simple issue, and the lengths the conversation has stretched to (on both sides) has had me raising eyebrows while reading along. I just don’t get it. Everything seems to fall neatly under the ‘don’t be a jerk’ rule (which has a subset of ‘don’t threadshit’). I can’t believe how far from that premise some of these arguments have gone. Seriously, don’t be a jerk. I’m honestly surprised that this is such an issue. A group of people have pointed out that a type of jerkiness on this board has become pervasive and unmoderated. The mods listened to that, obviously agreed and reacted by moderating (and with only notes, not warnings FFS!) to change that type of jerkiness from being such a pervasive part of the board culture. So far so good, IMO. Rule = Don’t be a jerk. Mods warn “And oh hey, just to let you know - that is actually kinda jerky so don’t post like that”. Everyone happy. Except the jerks, so win-win
But then somehow the whole thing explodes and ends up encompassing everything from “condoms aren’t sexual”, “all jokes are banned”, etc etc.
Exactly. Seems to me it’s ridiculously simple: don’t be a jerk. If you are a blatant jerk, you’ll get a warning (if the jerkiness is noticed). If you get a mod note don’t get defensive, just realise that maybe you were a jerk inadvertently and stop doing that, and/or ask for clarification (in ATMB) if you’re honestly confused.
So you admit you were wrong to go on and on about GQ and Great Debates being a place for these types of threads like you insisted before? Also, I’ve been saying IMHO all along you’re just now noticing it and backing off your MPSIMS comment as if this is the first time I’ve said it as in “Finally, a step up!” ?!? That’s what I’ve said all along.
[del]Also, not going to answer about “the issue” about “the thread” that you seem to believe is the problem? [/del] Nevermind, I don’t care anymore. Whatever you think, think it. It doesn’t matter.
Of course I don’t think death notices, illness notices, child illnesses and the like are a place for jokes and snark. Duh. It’s don’t be a jerk. Just like posting OMG BOOOOOBS type responses in medical threads is a jerk move. No new rule there, just starting to not let those idiots slide with their little problem to ignore breasts or the creepy creepy panty comments **ladyfoxfire **gave examples of earlier.
Thanks for finding those. It obviously is a serious problem and I’d like to see more draconian moderation in response to that sort of crap. I appreciate you taking the time.
Five examples given. Do you feel that these were threads that were about joking topics? And do you feel that the responses that Enginerd mentioned were appropriate? Were these post, in your opinion, examples of jerkish behavior?
I’m not sure that Twicks an Ellen made that distinction, but assuming the did, I don’t see a prob with crap like “I’d like to paddle THAT Pope’s ass” or “Oh baybe…lemme fiddle with your rosaries” or what ever was said…the woman sexualized whateverthhell point she was trying to make and as long as she’s not a poster here, who cares? (ok, obviously some people care, but…since she’s not a board member, why should she be protected?)
Yeah, there’s a real undercurrent coming from one side of this debate that’s a little over-the-top, disturbing and IMO out-of-line here. A few posters are convinced that the men here who post dirty/sexual/juvenile humor are either:
Sexual assailants
Using dirty jokes posts for masturbation fodder
Perverts
Defenders of such behavior
How is this acceptable? How is it *not *okay to use language that lumps a group of women together with negative language (“sluts,” “hysterical,” “asking for it,” etc.) but it’s apparently ok to lump a group of men together by accusing them of, among other things, sexual assault?
How is it okay to refer to actual posters here as “obnoxious douchebags” and sexual assailants, but supposedly under the new guidelines it would be against the rules to actually refer to a group of offended women as “shrill hysterical harpies” or “feminazis” (terms **ladyfoxyfyre ** brought into this thread).
That being said, I agree that certain “pics”-type posts need to go.
I have been reading along (well, for some of the misogyny stuff – there was A LOT of it so I didn’t read all of it) but as a woman reading the board I thought I would throw my (somewhat less valuable than) two cents in. I think the new rules have the potential to be good. They may be over-moderated, they may not be, – we have to wait and see. Yes, a lot of the crappy, pervasive creepster vibe could – and should – be moderated under “don’t be a jerk” but the outcry against secret rules and whatnot made it necessary to codify and specify what would be looked at when modding for sexism. It shouldn’t have been necessary, but apparently it was. Fine, whatever. I could not care less about the popechick – what she did was deliberately sexualized so yeah, joke away. She was aiming for controversial, and she hit the mark. That sort of joking doesn’t bother me. But it gets old to read about serious questions being answered with “TITS OR GTFO” or “pics or it didn’t happen.” Yeah, someone might say something like that in a gathering of friends, but there may be consequences to the remark, and someone would be wise to be aware of it.
For instance, I may start a side conversation in a gathering of mixed company, speaking to a friend “Hey, this is going on with my lady parts, etc.” She and I converse. It’s not a secret, nor are we screaming it across the room. Random guy walks up and says “Lady Parts! I’ll give you a mammogram/gyno exam/ whatever!!!” There are immediate consequences – Skeeve may get a laugh, he may get a smack, he may get ostracized, he may get told to GTFO. If I was telling my friend I am worried I may have cancer, Skeeve will get a different reaction than if I was telling my friend I dressed up like the pope, took off my pants and handed out condoms. CONTEXT IS KEY. Going into a thread just to post skeevy jokes should have some sort of consequence. Is it appropriate to the subject? No? Then maybe you shouldn’t do that. If you do it anyway, should there be a consequence?
I understand the concern that overmoderation may result- but the clarification of the rules may be a good thing, too. We have to see. Anyway, I have not said anything that has not already been said, but I wanted to throw my opinion in too.
Actually, after looking through those it seems that this “problem” is rather minor. The threads all carried on quite well despite the innappropriate jokes that were made. In fact, you see a stupid joke or two in the beginning and then that’s all. The last one you link too has stupid jokes at 7, 9, 12, and then they’re finished. No etc…
Not trying to defend those particular posts because they were jerkish. But, if that’s the best example we’ve got I’m not impressed. I mean as others have pointed out, there are other groups on these forums that get it much worse. I.e. Christians and conservatives. This does seem to be a solution looking for a problem.
