This is polite?
I am sorry if I was brusque - I had no intention, I was running out the door. I only meant to warn that in the past, we have been told (rightfully so) that we should not mix #straightdope and the SDMB.
If you’re talking about the thread I think you are, any newbie or reg could have gotten away with that comment without an official warning; horrifyingly tasteless though I think it is, it’s not against the GD rules to express a desire for a public figure to commit suicide. And TampaFlyer is by no means a reg, or at least does not seem that way from my lofty 3000+ post vantage. 
I think it’s a question of proportion; if a person has 900 good, useful, law-abiding posts and nine where he’s a bit of an ass, he won’t get banned. If a person has one good, useful, law-abiding post and nine where he’s a bit of an ass, he’s on very thin ice. I don’t consider that to be giving regs more acceptance; it is simply acknowledging that no one is perfect 100% of the time, but that being jerkish 1% of the time is considerably more acceptable than being jerkish 90% of the time. I suppose we could try hard-and-fast rules like “five jerky posts and you’re out”, but I think it would be grossly unfair to boot someone with five jerky posts over five years just the same as someone with five jerky posts in their first hour.
I think that Gadarene’s assesment is correct. It’s something that’s noticed. A good case, not to dredge it up again, is Upham. A nice enough poster. He posted two topics of somewhat questionable taste, but certainly better than most people have done. He had one thread closed by Euty (which I don’t have a problem with) and a Pit thread was started about him where people called him a troll and an idiot. If any established poster had posted those two threads they would have not gotten the same treatment.
“Your point is taken however, and no further reference will be made to <reference deleted> or <reference deleted>, or even to <censored>.”
Not a wise idea, Koevoet . . . others have done this and some met rather unhappy mods . . . in the form of not being allowed to post in a particular forum for a week or so.
Take chat problems to chat:) Simple enough, no? #straightdope is an entity separate and apart entirely from The Straight Dope.
“Regards
Koevoet, Gwala, nSibenza, cheesa cheesa.”
What in the blazes does this mean?
OK, not quite polite, but not a rant either.
oldscratch wrote
But that’s how life works. You start with zero, and by your actions you accumulate reputation. If you’ve been at it a while making positive accomplishments and you falter you’ll get more slack. You’ve earned it.
Well I could but I won’t because I wasn’t the moderator in either case.
You have to keep in mind that we have newbies posting everyday, the vast majority of which post without incident. Everyone only remembers the ones who come in, break the rules and get yelled at. We don’t scrutinize all newbie behavior.
And we are often suspicious of new posters who are quick to criticize the way this board is run. Historically, such posters have been previously banned posters who’ve reregistered and have an axe to grind. This board is constantly under attack by various people: former posters and otherwise. There are people out there who have tremendous pathetic petty rage against the board and the people who moderate it. They get a bizzare satisfaction out of anything that could potentially throw this board into chaos. They whine about us on other places on the internet. We get posters who harrass us over email long after they were axed. What can I say? Being the coolest MB on the net is like being the hottest woman in a club. People either adore you or despise you.
That doesn’t give us mods an excuse to be snotty to everyone, but it does give us reason to be suspicious of a lot of posters who act a certain way, even if those posters turn out to be essentailly good.
Considering that it is rather bad nettiquette to not be completely familiar with the rules of an interactive online forum before posting to said forum, I think we are very forgiving of rookie mistakes.
Alphagene and Gaudere: I understand what both of you are saying, and I will add that the tendencies to which I was referring are more commonly found in posters, not moderators–in which case, perhaps, my points were less relevant to this discussion than they could have been. That being said, though, I do think that some moderators can have short fuses–of which the threads linked in the OP are two examples–and that these fuses, when sparked, are more likely to detonate on new posters than on old ones, sometimes in disproportion to the actual trangression committed.
I just reread that paragraph. I must be preparing for law school or something; yikes. Heretofore, forthwith, inasmuch as notwithstanding. 
I didn’t mean to imply the process isn’t subjective. Some specific violations are no-brainers, e.g. hacking, spam, etc. But as for other “jerkish” behavior? By philosophy and pragmatism, the goal is to be pretty hands-off, so some of the rules are common-sensical–and therefore subjective.
Continuing the party analogy, it’s the difference between saying, “C’mon in, have great time but don’t cause hassles and ruin the fun” and “C’mon in, have a great time but you can’t play with the cat, use the phone, don’t mention divorce to Cousin Fred, don’t look mean around Wilma because she’s vulnerable right now, use coasters, only smoke on the deck with permission from everyone here…”
This sounds facetious, but it isn’t so far off the mark. The only workable alternative is to expect people to use good judgment–I’d say on both sides, but it isn’t a case of sides, and the levels of responsiblity aren’t the same.
But that isn’t the way it is. You seem to be asking for a blanket admission of guilt, or at least of a double-secret probation hidden agenda. The bland, boring truth is, just ain’t so. Heck, the point is to keep the great posters we already have and keep on attracting more. We’re growing by leaps and bounds, and it’s a pretty heady, bright, funny, opinionated crowd. What on earth would we possibly gain by systematically offending innocent posters, and how long do you think any of us would have our jobs–unpaid or not–if we did?
Veb
Since Koevoets (“crowbar” in Dutch and Afrikaans (RSA)) profile states he’s from South Africa, originally, my guess is on Xhosa (sp?) in this case.
Koevoet, welcome aboard. I’ve visited your country, and enjoyed it thoroughly. But please don’t mistake #straightdope for the Straight Dope Message Board. It’s akin to two bars that happen to have the same regulars.
Baaie dankie
SPOOFE Bo Diddly said:
Hmm…taken to its logical extreme, this would suggest that all posters who make one fuckup of any sort should be banned immediately, so they don’t have a chance to get agitated over being reprimanded and start the cycle. Veryearly intervention.
Thankee
You are quite correct.
I was refering to Anthracites coal-mining.
The comment is based on a mining language called Fanakalo
Koevoet being a large crowbar, Gwala being similar and sometime a short prybar, sibenza meaning work, and a cheesa is a flare for lighting fuse for blasting.
So basically “get the big crowbar, get the little one, work fast, and I am lighting the dynamite”
fluit, fluit, my storie is uit.
Koevoet
Veb: How did you get from my post that I was asking for “a blanket admission of guilt?” Honestly, I don’t think guilt enters into it. It might be more correct to say that I’d like to see an acknowledgment of fallibility, but Gaudere and Alphagene have already done as much, without surrendering a modicum of their stature as moderators. I am interested in manhattan’s response to the OP; I’m content to wait for that or to be disappointed, though, because I know he’s busy.
Trust me, I’m not looking to assign blame anywhere here–I’m just commenting on my personal observations.
I acknowledged fallibility? Where?!?!
Well, you talked about “acknowledging that no one is perfect 100% of the time”–but now that I reread the passage, I see you were referring only to regular posters, not Gaudesses like yourself whose perfection befits a library of hagiographies. My mistake.
**
Well here’s a clear admission of fallibity!–>asssume smiley<-- Bad case of sloppy posting on my part. (That’s what I get for trying to “sneak” at work, where my train of thought crashes regularly anyway.)
I was applying the blanket admission of guilt to the concept that an unfair, tiered system is used and condoned by the mods and admins. I’m deadly serious about this. I wouldn’t participate in it, and from all experience, neither would anyone else.
Fallible? Of course; how could it be otherwise? Same with using subjective judgment. But the base system is fair and there are checks and balances in place to at least try to ensure consistency.
Veb
No, Veb, that’s not my position or sentiment at all. I have read the registration agreement, and I know that we as board members do not have any “rights” at all. Posting privileges can be terminated for any reason at all at the discretion of the board administration. I recognize that, and don’t really have any dispute with it.
I was not requesting any kind of detailed description from the moderators or administration about the case, nor do I expect it to be put to a vote by the other members of the SDMB. But as you imply, and as has been stated repeatedly on ATMB and elsewhere, the main bannable offense is to “be a jerk.” Statements have been made by Lynn and many moderators that you generally have to work at it for a very considerable period of time to be considered a jerk and be banned. Based on the public record, grienspace does not appear to have been that kind of a jerk. Normally, on a thread of this kind, or on the one that grienspace started, other members will cite other instances of bad behavior by by the member in the hot seat, and provide links to threads and quotes. The Pit threads devoted to JDT and peace are rife with such examples. In the space of two threads and more thab 90 posts so far (and over 2000 views), no one has provided a single example of other bad behavior by grienspace. Without attempting to search through grienspace’s 200 or so posts myself, this does leave the impression that he is being threatened with banning, and much more seriously with the loss of his ISP service, for nothing more serious than posting in the wrong forum twice.
A simple statement by a moderator or administrator that grienspace in fact did do something more serious than that (possibly off the board), and was in fact a jerk, without necessarily going into the gory details, would do a great deal to clear the air. That kind of statement is in fact routinely made by moderators who join in on this kind of Pit threads. No such statement has been made in this case, despite the participation on the thread of several moderators. This simply serves to reinforce the impression that no infraction of this kind has occurred, and emphasize the apparently very unusual nature of this case. I for one would drop out of this discussion in a microsecond if a moderator would just state either that (1) grienspace committed a more serious infraction than posting in the wrong forum, and was in fact a serious jerk; or (2) posting in the wrong forum is regarded by the board administration as a bannable offense. While I might disagree with the second proposition, if that is board policy, I’d accept it.
Hmm. I guess that while I think of it as a tiered system, I don’t necessarily see it either as being “condoned” or even particularly unfair. Just so long (everyone!) as no one’s presuming the mods to be incapable of occasional errors in judgment. I think that y’all do yeoman’s work, and do it well; in fact, I respect you guys so much that I’d like to think I’m free to call you out if your actions seem inconsistent, and to expect a reasonable and civil response. So far in this thread, my expectations have been met entirely.
You are correct. I was just trying to head off assertations that it wasn’t working that way.