# mswas one month too much? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 29, 2009, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141 "2009-08-29T07:05:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/101 "2009-08-30T14:16:18Z")
> [@Oy](#): > > The point is, he opened one thread intended to provoke, and when that was closed he opened another. And another. And finally one in the Pit, where he apparently decided he had sussed out the Liberals’ secret agenda to kill Mary Jo Kopechne and dance on her grave, or to blame her for her own death or something. > > My point is, he was being remarkably persistent, even though his clearly expressed views were already present in the earlier threads to anyone who might be interested, even though they had been closed. Looks to me like someone spoiling for a fight. And looks to me like someone trying to express himself despite hoards of touchy-feely leftist torch bearers believing themselves to have the God-like quality of perceiving someone else’s intentions. One of the threads, incidentally, was an ATMB thread in which he tried to air a grievance about his thread closings which, as you are aware, is (now) the appropriate forum for doing so. Counting it as one of the “four” is either disingenuous or ill-informed about board policy. It has been said that we tend to judge ourselves by our intentions, and others by their behavior. I have yet to meet a person who believed he was not well intentioned. How about you? Do you believe your intentions are ulterior? I doubt that mswas is any different in that regard. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/102 "2009-08-30T14:20:22Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > How can you when the rules are made up on the spur of the moment, never to be mentioned again. > > Lynn got butthurt that someone posted something she didn’t like about planned parenthood and invented a magical new rule (which, please note, hasn’t been enforced one single time since she invented it) that all threads in The Pit must have 100% factually accurate thread titles. And the invention of this magical new rule and it’s retroactive application (“I’m going to warn you for breaking this rule that didn’t exist when you posted”) caused a meltdown. > > Now Twickster (who I like, and I very much appreciate that she recinded the warning) invented another new rule: no celebrity snark in MPSIMS despite the fact that it has _always_ been allowed before. And as a result we have yet another poster meltdown. > > Just a yesterday, Tuba point-blank invented a new rule that you can’t be snarky and sarcastic in ATMB and warned Leander, despite Dex point-blank posting (close quote–I can’t find the thread yet) “It is and always has been fine to post snarky, sarcastic comments in ATMB. Just not direct insults.” Which Mswas didn’t. Dex’s rule was less than 5 months old. And Leander just started another thread about this new insta-retroactive rule. > > Guys, I’m happy to follow the rules here, but I can’t follow them if you keep pulling them out of your collective asses and applying them retroactively. > > C’mon–I know there’s posters that piss you off. But making up rules that apply retroactively is neither fair nor appropriate nor conducive to making posters _want_ to obey rules. It is unfortunate that my posting knocked this one back a page. It deserves to be seen. Fenris is right. The notion of Tuba declaring that one cannot be snarky in ATMB is utterly laughable. She has improved lately, for the most part. But the ruling is sudden, and flies in the face of rulings by other mods and her own standards of behavior for years running. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/103 "2009-08-30T14:38:17Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > And looks to me like someone trying to express himself despite hoards of touchy-feely leftist torch bearers believing themselves to have the God-like quality of perceiving someone else’s intentions. Do you own a dictionary with the word “irony” in it? Would you like one? > [@Liberal](#): > > It is unfortunate that my posting knocked this one back a page. It deserves to be seen. Fenris is right. The notion of Tuba declaring that one cannot be snarky in ATMB is utterly laughable. Indeed, blatant fiction is utterly laughable when presented as fact. Also, again, you need that dictionary? You’re busily suggesting that snark in ATMB is “goading” and thus shouldn’t be allowed. I suggest you take a big highlighter and go to town on the “irony” entry. > [@Fenris](#): > > Just a yesterday, Tuba point-blank invented a new rule that you can’t be snarky and sarcastic in ATMB and warned Leander, despite Dex point-blank posting (close quote–I can’t find the thread yet) “It is and always has been fine to post snarky, sarcastic comments in ATMB. Just not direct insults.” Which Mswas didn’t. Dex’s rule was less than 5 months old. And Leander just started another thread about this new insta-retroactive rule. This is not even approaching anything that’s true. It was not about posting snarky or sarcastic comments, but flaming someone (who happened to be me) in ATMB by saying that they were “foaming at the mouth” and always produced “spittle flecked rants” and so on. That’s Pit stuff, not “snarky and sarcastic” comments. You have also rather strangely distorted what Dex actually said. He didn’t in fact, post in the original thread, but the second one that leander made. Readers can notice for themselves that Dex posted nowhere [in the original thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=529447) and in fact bucked up Tuba in the secondary thread. What he actually said was: [ > [@](#): > > I guess I’m confused about how a post (rather than a poster) can “froth at the mouth.” Seems to me that’s pretty clearly a comment about a poster rather than a post. > > In any case, you were certainly stereotyping a poster’s type of posts. Note the difference between: > ACCEPTABLE: Your post #42 in this thread is mere ranting. > NOT ACCEPTABLE: You are ranting yet again, as you always do. ]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11499940&postcount=11](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11499940&postcount=11)) And Lib? You’re currently serving as a very, very good object lesson of both why this whole mind reading schtick fails, as well as why your expressed standards would make any official a very, very poor judge of what “goading” is. And, of course, why under your system “pointing out bullshit in a Lib post” would get someone a mod warning, because evidently calling you out might provoke some sort of emotional… whatever. It would, of course, were you not so serene and beyond it, as you have now repeatedly informed us. Evidently pointing out that your post was bombastic and hilariously overblown somehow ‘proved’ your entire argument. I attempted to take the piss out of your truly risible post that was all about DRAMA!!!, and lo and behold your response is to try to turn that into something which is chock full of, yep, DRAMA!!! I pointed out how your argument was needlessly and absurdly bombastic about this, ahem, “travesty”, but you’ve now ignored me a bit while continuing to talk about me. Should that, then, be goading? Do you deserve a mod warning? After all, you obviously are not accurately perceiving my remarks or engaging me in conversation when I try to clear up your ignorance, but you _are_ interested in continually accusing me of behavior that you believe should lead to moderator sanction. You don’t want to talk _to_ me, but you want to keep talking _about_ me and how I deserve to have the mods thump me on the head. So I must demand Mod Justice, due to your unfairly goading me. Right? I need protection, modly protection. Right? Should you be banned, or just Warned for this continual ‘goading’? No, because I have a skin that’s not measured in nanometers and I recognize that your argument is silly and I can still point that out without having to stoop to the truly unpalatable level of blaming you for my own volitional behavior. > [@Liberal](#): > > So, sorry. But the mods being too dense or stupid or whatever failing is required to tell goading from disagreement just doesn’t hold water. One might wonder what failings are required to see such persecution where none such exists… but this probably isn’t the proper forum. > [@Liberal](#): > > Look at FinnAgain’s recent postings for examples of goading. That’s what goading is. “Oh, looky Lib… DRAAAAAMA!” or some such idiotic snark. It just doesn’t work on me anymore is all. Obviously it doesn’t work on you. “It” being my attempt to get you to look at your blatant dramafest of an argument and ratchet back the absurd hyperbolic rhetoric about the “travesty” of free-to-post message board moderation. I tried to point out just how ludicrous your drama-loving and thoroughly overblown post was, and you’re now (lo and behold) trying to make a single mildly snarky line into (who’d a thunk it?)… DRAMA!!! Because I’m OUT TO GET YOU!!! And evidently all the time I spent trying to talk you down and explain what I was doing is wasted, because all my recent postings are all, also, OUT TO GET YOU! But no, I wasn’t pointing out that your post was bombastically hyperbolic. You’re right. I’m out to get you. I’m goading you, I’m trying to make you go insane, I’m trying to make you flip out, I’m trying to put you off your feed, I’m trying to make you crawl up the walls, really, my time here is all about you. But it’s not working! My dastardly plans are all foiled, because you are just too hep for my insidious goading to find a chink in your resplendent armor (as you keep pointing out, unasked). Truly, I am sad. You are too wise for my nefarious goading to work. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2009, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/104 "2009-08-30T14:39:41Z")
> [@](#): > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11300755&postcount=24](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11300755&postcount=24) Per Dex, about 2 months prior. > [@Tomndebb](#): > > Nice bit of equivocation there [Quote=Fenris] So…just to be clear sarcasm and smarminess is allowed in ATMB? [/quote] > [@Dex](#): > > Yes, and always has been… as long as the sarcasm and smarminess doesn’t cross the line into being personal insult. Note that Tom was saying _I_ was lying/being dishonest (‘equivocating’) not the typical brainless-but-legal construction of “Your posts are filled with equivocation” and Dex specifically said that it was legal.. Two months ago. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2009, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/105 "2009-08-30T14:42:31Z")
[quote=“FinnAgain, post:103, topic:508141”] > [@](#): > > You have also rather strangely distorted what Dex actually said. He didn’t in fact, post in the original thread, but the second one that leander made. Readers can notice for themselves that Dex posted nowhere [in the original thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=529447) and in fact bucked up Tuba in the secondary thread. What he actually said was: See my previous post. We are miscommunicating and talking about two seperate posts. The quote you had from Dex directly contradicts the ruling he made 2 months ago. Two months ago, it was just fine to insult a poster here as long as you finessed the words properly. Now? It’s not, so much. I don’t care which set of rules are chosen, but _pick one set and stick with it._ ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/106 "2009-08-30T15:04:30Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Do you own a dictionary with the word “irony” in it? > Would you like one? > > Indeed, blatant fiction is utterly laughable when presented as fact. > Also, again, you need that dictionary? You’re busily suggesting that snark in ATMB is “goading” and thus shouldn’t be allowed. > > I suggest you take a big highlighter and go to town on the “irony” entry. > > This is not even approaching anything that’s true. It was not about posting snarky or sarcastic comments, but flaming someone (who happened to be me) in ATMB by saying that they were “foaming at the mouth” and always produced “spittle flecked rants” and so on. That’s Pit stuff, not “snarky and sarcastic” comments. > > You have also rather strangely distorted what Dex actually said. He didn’t in fact, post in the original thread, but the second one that leander made. Readers can notice for themselves that Dex posted nowhere [in the original thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=529447) and in fact bucked up Tuba in the secondary thread. What he actually said was: > > [url=[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11499940&postcount=11](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11499940&postcount=11)] > > And Lib? > You’re currently serving as a very, very good object lesson of both why this whole mind reading schtick fails, as well as why your expressed standards would make any official a very, very poor judge of what “goading” is. > And, of course, why under your system “pointing out bullshit in a Lib post” would get someone a mod warning, because evidently calling you out might provoke some sort of emotional… whatever. It would, of course, were you not so serene and beyond it, as you have now repeatedly informed us. > > Evidently pointing out that your post was bombastic and hilariously overblown somehow ‘proved’ your entire argument. I attempted to take the piss out of your truly risible post that was all about DRAMA!!!, and lo and behold your response is to try to turn that into something which is chock full of, yep, DRAMA!!! > > I pointed out how your argument was needlessly and absurdly bombastic about this, ahem, “travesty”, but you’ve now ignored me a bit while continuing to talk about me. > Should that, then, be goading? Do you deserve a mod warning? > After all, you obviously are not accurately perceiving my remarks or engaging me in conversation when I try to clear up your ignorance, but you _are_ interested in continually accusing me of behavior that you believe should lead to moderator sanction. You don’t want to talk _to_ me, but you want to keep talking _about_ me and how I deserve to have the mods thump me on the head. So I must demand Mod Justice, due to your unfairly goading me. Right? > I need protection, modly protection. Right? > > Should you be banned, or just Warned for this continual ‘goading’? > > No, because I have a skin that’s not measured in nanometers and I recognize that your argument is silly and I can still point that out without having to stoop to the truly unpalatable level of blaming you for my own volitional behavior. > > One might wonder what failings are required to see such persecution where none such exists… but this probably isn’t the proper forum. > > Obviously it doesn’t work on you. > “It” being my attempt to get you to look at your blatant dramafest of an argument and ratchet back the absurd hyperbolic rhetoric about the “travesty” of free-to-post message board moderation. > I tried to point out just how ludicrous your drama-loving and thoroughly overblown post was, and you’re now (lo and behold) trying to make a single mildly snarky line into (who’d a thunk it?)… DRAMA!!! Because I’m OUT TO GET YOU!!! > And evidently all the time I spent trying to talk you down and explain what I was doing is wasted, because all my recent postings are all, also, OUT TO GET YOU! > > But no, I wasn’t pointing out that your post was bombastically hyperbolic. > You’re right. I’m out to get you. > I’m goading you, I’m trying to make you go insane, I’m trying to make you flip out, I’m trying to put you off your feed, I’m trying to make you crawl up the walls, really, my time here is all about you. But it’s not working! > My dastardly plans are all foiled, because you are just too hep for my insidious goading to find a chink in your resplendent armor (as you keep pointing out, unasked). > > Truly, I am sad. > You are too wise for my nefarious goading to work. Jesus. Talk about drama. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/107 "2009-08-30T15:05:00Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > See my previous post. We are miscommunicating and talking about two seperate posts. I don’t see any Dex posts about Tuba’s recent Warning of Leander other than the one I just cited. Which are you talking about? > [@Fenris](#): > > The quote you had from Dex directly contradicts the ruling he made 2 months ago. No, it doesn’t. Accusing someone of the fallacy of equivocation is not a personal insult. Accusing someone of frothing at the mouth is. Equivocation simply does not mean lying, it means being inconsistent with how a term is used. Pointing out, or erroneously clamming for that matter, that someone’s post contains a fallacy (eg. you are equivocating, that is a strawman, you’ve made a false analogy, etc…) is allowed. But accusing someone of spewing spittle or being rabid is not the same as alleging a fallacious argument has been used. And if I remember correctly, at the time you spoke to me about the issue I agreed that Liberal was advancing an absurd, self-serving argument, but I still do not think that Tom flamed you. We could debate whether or not he was correct in his charge that you’d used the fallacy of equivocation (but I’d rather not), but that isn’t the point. “Your statement evinces the fallacy of equivocation” is simply not on the same level as “you are rabid.” > [@Fenris](#): > > Two months ago, it was just fine to insult a poster here as long as you finessed the words properly. Now? It’s not, so much. Not true. Two months ago snark and sarcasm were allowed, now, they still are (notice I haven’t received moderator intervention for my snarky and sarcastic ribbing of Lib’s earlier drama-laden post, despite his repeated objections of how horribly I am “goading” him). The rules here, at least in the six years I’ve been posting and the year before that when I was lurking, have always been that you can be insult_ing_ (to a point) and that a certain degree of cleverness in your rhetoric would allow you to place your toes firmly on the line, but that direct personal insults have been against the rules. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/108 "2009-08-30T16:44:37Z")
Meh, it’s a message board, not a codified set of laws under constant review by learned judged who refer to a constitution. I _expect_ inconsistencies in the rules and how they are applied. ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/109 "2009-08-30T17:05:22Z")
The Internet: :eek: SERIOUS BUSINESS :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/110 "2009-08-30T17:39:17Z")
Does anyone think this thread is productive right now? It’s time to move on. mswas was making strong efforts at the end of the Pit thread to dial it down, and I can’t imagine that this thread is helping that in any way with him not being able to respond. None of us are having any sort of success in divining the intentions of anyone’s posts, which has been the crux of this current disagreement. Just let it go. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/111 "2009-08-30T18:08:09Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > The only problem is that from my perspective, being neither Democrat nor Republican, the hair triggers seem to be all over the people who call themselves “liberals”. They just get the vapors when something offends their delicate sensibilities, and they feverishly peck out something designed basically to push the offender’s buttons — sort of returning what they feel is treatment in kind. It wasn’t the “liberals” who started in with their sexual fantasies about other posters sucking their cocks, is what I’m saying. **mswas** chose to make things way personal pretty much off the bat. He wasn’t responding “in kind” to anything. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/112 "2009-08-30T19:15:29Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Jesus. Talk about drama. That was funny. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/113 "2009-08-30T19:34:33Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > It is unfortunate that my posting knocked this one back a page. It deserves to be seen. Fenris is right. The notion of Tuba declaring that one cannot be snarky in ATMB is utterly laughable. She has improved lately, for the most part. But the ruling is sudden, and flies in the face of rulings by other mods and her own standards of behavior for years running. IF that was what **Tuba** had done, that might be true. But that’s not what Tuba did. **Tuba** warned **leander** for insults in ATMB. **leander** in his thread about whether or not he was actually insulting people has admitted as how he maybe didn’t really comprehend the difference between insulting a person and making a comment about a particular post they made. I’m not saying he’s totally on board with the idea that **Tuba** ’s warning was fully earned, but let’s at least TRY not to mischaracterize things when discussing them, eh? ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/114 "2009-08-30T19:39:17Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > See my previous post. We are miscommunicating and talking about two seperate posts. The quote you had from Dex directly contradicts the ruling he made 2 months ago. > > Two months ago, it was just fine to insult a poster here as long as you finessed the words properly. Now? It’s not, so much. > > I don’t care which set of rules are chosen, but _pick one set and stick with it._ You have SPECIFICALLY quoted **Dex** as saying that “personal insult” is not allowed. **Tuba** warned **leander** for personal insults. What part of this is inconsistent for you? Are you truly incapable of differentiating a snarky response to a post from personally insulting a poster? If so, you will have trouble in certain forums here, I’m thinking… :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/115 "2009-08-30T19:43:14Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Does anyone think this thread is productive right now?\ Well, it keeps people busy. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/116 "2009-08-30T22:23:41Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That was funny. 😉 The funny thing is that Liberal has not noticed the drama mongering in his own posts. He’s now accused me of being out to get him for, what, two or three posts now? (Evidently I’ve been out to get him in more than my first post to him). He’s been calling for the mods to protect him from my nefarious designs of being out to get him and still doesn’t seem able to recognize the inherent drama mongering of referring to message board moderation as a travesty. Even my attempts to explain to him why I would point out the absurd dramaqueenery of his post are, too, just examples of how I’m out to get him and the mods should protect him from me. Except, of course, he’s also too strong and wise to need that protection, because despite being out to get him, it’s not working. But when I point out what he’s been doing, all of a sudden he can recognize drama in someone _else’s_ post. Luckily “introspection” is rather close to “irony” in that ol’ dictionary. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/117 "2009-08-30T22:53:06Z")
**mswas** board-shat, to the point of explosive diarrhea, every forum on this board - with the exception of this one. It’s no surprise to see that the few, the proud who do most of their posting on this board in the form of complaints about its supervision are trying to fill in that hole for him. Good job, gang. :rolleyes: > [@Marley23](#): > > He was suspended for a month in early 2006 and given a final warning for behavior that was pretty similar to what he’s been doing lately. How final is a “final warning”? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/118 "2009-08-30T23:06:24Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > The funny thing is that Liberal has not noticed the drama mongering in his own posts. He’s now accused me of being out to get him for, what, two or three posts now? (Evidently I’ve been out to get him in more than my first post to him). He’s been calling for the mods to protect him from my nefarious designs of being out to get him and still doesn’t seem able to recognize the inherent drama mongering of referring to message board moderation as a travesty. Even my attempts to explain to him why I would point out the absurd dramaqueenery of his post are, too, just examples of how I’m out to get him and the mods should protect him from me. Except, of course, he’s also too strong and wise to need that protection, because despite being out to get him, it’s not working. > > But when I point out what he’s been doing, all of a sudden he can recognize drama in someone _else’s_ post. > > Luckily “introspection” is rather close to “irony” in that ol’ dictionary. I know what you are saying, and it certainly isn’t without merit. Liberal has been and can be a drama queen. That’s a fact. I thought he made some good points on the previous page. But, regardless, I was just commenting on his come back after quoting all you had said. Sorry, it was funny. I would think that you, of all people, would be able to appreciate a hand well played. I was really just commenting on the juxtaposition he used. I had attempted to follow each point made by each of you, but frankly, I gave up. Just too much effort, especially since I find it diverting from the topic of the thread. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/119 "2009-08-30T23:21:48Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But, regardless, I was just commenting on his come back after quoting all you had said. Sorry, it was funny. Oh, I don’t deny that, it was a good piece of snark. I just found it funny that Lib can recognize dramaqueenery when I post his own claims back at him, but he can’t when it’s in his own posts. And the back and forth isn’t hard to follow, really. I pointed out that it was dramaqueenery to talk about message board moderation as if it was a “travesty” even if there was a valid concern somewhere several notches below the bombast. Liberal claimed that I was out to get him and was trying to goad him into some sort of emotional breakdown, but that he was too hep for that to work. I tried to explain that I had no interest in seeing him flip out, but was just pointing out the absurdity of the drama mongering. Then he went on for a few posts to talk about how the mods should protect him from me since I was obviously out to get him and my posts served as the prototypical example of the type of ‘goading’ that should result in moderator action. It is of course a diversion from the topic of the thread, but it’s been an amusing ball of string for me to play with. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2009, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141/120 "2009-08-30T23:27:39Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > How final is a “final warning”? It is very final–for a limited duration. In the first couple of years that the SDMB operated, warnings that a poster was _in extremis_ were pretty much absolute. However, as the board has aged, we have taken a slightly different tack. If a poster receives a final Warning and then goes a long interval without another Warning, we don’t think it is really fair to kick him out with no further recourse. There are at least a half dozen posters who had received “final Warnings” several years ago who are posting in good standing, today, having received no Warnings in the mean time. If one of them steps out of line one time, no one on the staff is going to argue for banning them right away. When looking over infractions, we look at all aspects of the situation, including seriousness of the offense, frequency of the offenses, and currency of previous offenses. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mswas-one-month-too-much/508141.md?page=7)