There was a poster named Q.E.D.
He was warned a number of times (and suspended once) for junior modding (acting like a mod even though he was only a poster).
Hence the joke. 
Oh, that was before my time. But I guess it makes sense. I was really hoping that you, given your eloquence and seemingly robust general knowledge, would have been aware of what I meant.
Alas, it was I who didn’t understand. As my friend says, “You weren’t speaking into my listening.”
SPEAKING AS MODERATOR: I sort of think it’s obvious that when I’m posting about board rules and interpretations thereof, I’m posting as a Moderator. How could it be otherwise?
When a moderator is speaking about rulings and interpretations and moderating practices, they are speaking as moderator. When they are speaking about politics, religion, sex, cinema, theatre, puppies, kittens, etc. they are speaking as posters. Again, I think that’s pretty much obvious.
The fact that there are A FEW situations where the line is blurred doesn’t mean that every situation is blurred; just as the existence of grey doesn’t deny the existence of black and white.
Generally, when we think that there is some possible ambiguity, we use some sort of terminology to distinguish.
To clarify, that means an objection to personal insults *by *a moderator (an regrettably frequent occurrence, as these recurring threads illustrate) should be met with an e-mail to a *different *moderator, *not *by use of the Report feature? That would end the problem of a mod having the privilege of judging his own behavior, at least. But if it’s the preferred procedure for such “special cases”, some notification of it to the public is warranted, isn’t it?
For instance, when I ask “have you read the board” it’s a “personal” insult but when Dex says to someone, “that’s just being a jerk.” that isn’t an insult, even when directed to someone, by name. Of course, he’s an administrator so nothing will happen because it seems the rule here is do as you’re told, not as the staff does. Also, and this is a nitpick, but if you’re going to swear at someone, Dex, it simply doesn’t do to misspell the swear: it’s goddammit. For instance, would it now be okay for me to say “that’s just what being retarded will do for you.”? Of course not, but then, I’m not staff.
Perhaps the word staff carries with it another meaning, such that it’s a large piece of wood used to ram up other people’s asses, or bludgeon them over the head. Because it surely isn’t restricted to the classical use of staff in terms of volunteerism or employment.
It’s hypocrisy plain and simple. Or do I get to say to people, “you’re acting like someone who hasn’t read the board.”, or “I’m not saying you’re trolling, but you’re acting just like a troll would.” and, of course, “you are acting like a retard.”
What’s up with the duality? Either personal insults aren’t allowed, or they are.
Dex’s job is to moderate - that is, enforce the rules. One of the BIG rules here is: *Don’t be a jerk. *When a moderator does his job and doesn’t explain, people whine, piss and moan. So when a moderator does his job, he usually tries to explain what rule is being broken. In this case the rule was: Don’t be a jerk.
Sticky on guidelines and ettiqutte
He explained why he was modding by saying:
There is no way to enforce the rule, explain the reason for enforcing it, without saying: by doing X you are being a jerk.
This complaint just isn’t valid.
Ok, the assertion that because he’s able to point to a rule as an excuse to that of being a jerk somehow doesn’t mean it’s still not a jerk thing to do is, well, retarded. Or do you really suggest that it’s not possible to politely tell someone to correct the behavior without calling him a jerk? How about a “tone down on the attitude”? See, that addressed conduct, not the person.
Gimme a break. We have people here misconstruing what we say when we’re explicit, how well do you (seriously) think indirect criticism would be?
When the jury says that they find someone guilty of theft, that person can’t sue on the grounds that the jury has slandered her.
Personal insults have to do with attacking a person for who they are, rather than for what they’re saying. Moderating has to do with telling people when they have violated the rules. Citing the charges against someone is NOT the same as insulting them. When the cop says, “You were speeding,” the accused can’t get all huffy about “innocent until proven guilty.” The cop is just citing the charges.
The alternative that you suggest is that basically that mods NOT tell people why they are receiving warnings. Not explain why something was a hijack, not even use the word hijack. Not explain that someone was engaged in jerkish behavior. Not explain, just warn. Oh, yeah, that’d go over well.
Nor can one sue anyone in court for what is said there. It’s a qualified immunity. I don’t see how this disposes of your problem.
Wrong. Wrong, wrong. I have advocated no such thing. Here’s a fantastic idea, instead of saying you’re being a jerk, or that’s a jerk thing to do, how about something which actually a description? “X statement” violates “cite of rule”?
I don’t see that this is difficult; moreover, I’ve noticed that you’ve adopted -in at least one thread anyway- my suggestion of parceling out in a post when you start and stop being a regular poster and a moderator. It didn’t seem to take a great deal of effort to break it up such that:
moderator hat and moderator bit,
regular poster hat and my personal opinion.
Was it much an undertaking, particularly if it makes explicit the stuff we’re saying is sometimes ambiguous?
moderators are useless anyway. Ewww, wuddnt want anyone to be “attacked” on a frickin’ message board, they might get their poor little feelings hurt.
Gimme a break.
You can use “report this post,” which triggers an email that is sent to all the mods of that forum, including the mod in question. Admins don’t get these automatic emails, so you’d need to write to them separately. In general, mods don’t perform as mods in forums other than the one(s) to which they are assigned, so emailing other mods isn’t going to do any good.
One of our rules – the most fundamental of our rules – is, and I quote, “Don’t be a jerk.” There is no way to cite that rule without using the word “jerk.”
How convenient.
The SDMB is a moderated board. If you wish to post here, you’re expected to follow the rules. If you don’t wish to follow the rules, you can either accept the consequences of ignoring them – warnings, followed by a suspension and/or banning – or you can find another message board elsewhere that is more to your liking.
SDBM. Love or leave it. After all, we’re a message board and as such, we don’t need any of you damn posters!
Meanwhile, I’d be great if you guys would make-up your minds on what those rules are instead on making them up on the fly and/or constantly tweaking them.*
And a pony. I want a pony.
*Best evaaah had to be the “non-Pit rules apply when addressing a mod in a Pit thread under some non-Pit circumstances” or some jabberwocky to that effect. Bring it back!
That may be, but every time I’ve done that, the reply has in fact been from the very mod whose own post has had to be reported, not from his forum partners. So why is there no rule or procedure requiring recusal in such a case?
So one should just start at that level, right?
No, of course not. Because it’s perfectly reasonable, like in a court of law, when having a complaint against the judging authority to have to relegate the decision to the person against whom one is making the charge. This is the very foundation* of our judicial system.
After all, if the method to have it dealt with by someone else is to e-mail an administrator, then what sense does it make to require of the person wishing to report the post to have to report it to the person with whom they take issue? Or, in the alternative, if a moderator’s post is reported, then can’t code be written which guarantees it will be CCed to at least another moderator or even an administrator?
By foundation I mean, of course, not at all a foundation since in some cases failing to recuse one’s self is grounds for disbarment.
In such a case, I recommend sending your complaint to Dex. He has the power to moderate the moderators, and the willingness to examine your complaint without bias.
Delete me please. I’m a useless post.
You are not obligated to use “report this post,” it is just the easiest and most convenient way to flag something that you think needs attention. Feel free to write separate emails or PMs to any or all of the admins.
Oohhh, the temptation!