# No, this is not an inappropriate comment **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 13, 2019, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717 "2019-10-13T15:11:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/21 "2019-10-13T21:39:01Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Getting observations about appearance out of all such discussions improves the nature of such discussions. I disagree that it inherently “improves” all discussions. And I would submit that it possibly worsens the board as a whole. We’re people and people appraise and discuss aesthetics, even the aesthetics of our fellow humans, all the time. It’s neither inherently bad nor inherently good, but it is something that happens all the time and is unlikely, in the world of humans, to stop anytime soon. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/22 "2019-10-13T21:40:02Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > **Bo** it would have helped if you included the entire comment from **Chronos**. > > You also failed to mention this comment from **wolfman** , after several additional comments in the thread. Yes, the moderation was appropriate. Yes, **wolfman** earned that warning. No it wouldn’t have been helpful, because I don’t have any issue with the warning; that’s **wolfman** ’s business, not mine. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/23 "2019-10-13T21:46:00Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > To be clear: I got a report on that thread (multiple reports, actually), I checked and saw that there was indeed a problem, and I dug down to the root of the problem. If the post about the moustache were the entirety of it, I probably wouldn’t have even posted any note at all (because it did not, as I said, violate any rules). Given that I was commenting on other aspects of the situation, however, I felt it necessary to comment on that post as well, and to acknowledge that it was, in fact, a hijack. Your “noting a hijack” as a moderator, however, and that carries weight. I don’t want to make a crack about someone’s new hairdo or missing eyebrows or facial tattoo and find myself facing a Mod note for “hijacking” the thread. It was ridiculous to note it here and call it out, IMO, and I’d like the Mods to acknowledge that talking about someone’s appearance isn’t out-of-bounds or incorrect in any way, as long as said commentary doesn’t rise to racist, sexist or otherwise abusive levels. ETA: the real problem with that thread was **Leaffan** blowing it up into a public disagreement, IMO. If he had just reported the post and let the mods deal with it, instead of trying to junior mod, it wouldn’t have even risen to the level of “hijack”, it just would have been a throw-away comment OR it could have turned into a discussion between **Leaffan** and **wolfman** about why they like or don’t like pornstaches. And I seriously doubt a side discussion on that would have drawn a “hijack” note on it’s own, just like any of the hundreds of brief side conversations in hundreds of threads here never do. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/24 "2019-10-13T21:55:34Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I am curious. > > If spoken of a female golfer or tennis pro: “Why does _Mary Mohawkhair_ choose to look like an understudy in a porn video?” > > Would you find that comment unremarkable in a thread on the game? I dunno about “unremarkable”. I’d want to know what she looked like, first. That’s pretty much what happened in the thread in question, too. Then, after I saw that she looked just like the lady from _Debbie Does Dallas_, yeah, I’d maybe want to make fun of her hair or something. We haven’t done feathered hair in decades, ffs; it would stand out as much as a flapper haircut would. > [@tomndebb](#): > > An easy way to “defend” behavior that attacks one group is to simply make it normal when directed against a more privileged group, even when it fails to bring the same ridicule. We are moving away from the habit of making irrelevant comments against female appearance and removing all such comments would seem to be the best way to eliminate claims that “we do it to males” even when male comments do not carry the same judgment or potential ridicule as similar comments toward females. There’s no group being attacked, **tom**. It was a comment about one person’s appearance. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/25 "2019-10-13T22:32:51Z")
> [@LC\_Strawhouse](#): > > Believe it or not, it’s a board rule that we can’t make fun of the Toronto Maple Leafs specifically. NO JOKE. It’s not a board rule, it’s a directive for you specifically. I know I’ve made a number of negative comments about the Leafs and what I regard as their privileged position in terms of revenues and special treatment by broadcasters yet perennial substandard performance, and of course there have been no repercussions for those comments. ---
**Author:** ![LC\_Strawhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@LC\_Strawhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LC_Strawhouse)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/26 "2019-10-13T22:56:24Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > It’s not a board rule, it’s a directive for you specifically. I know I’ve made a number of negative comments about the Leafs and what I regard as their privileged position in terms of revenues and special treatment by broadcasters yet perennial substandard performance, and of course there have been no repercussions for those comments. Good god, man - do not trifle with these matters! ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/27 "2019-10-13T23:49:02Z")
It’s silly – does this mean we can’t trash talk players now? I mean c’mon, **Leafan** , you know I like you, but this is silly. Pretty much all the pro-sports threads have comments making fun of teams and players. That being said, the dude DID act like a jerk in his reply. But general back and forth chirping? No, I don’t think that’s something that should be banned. > [@LC\_Strawhouse](#): > > Believe it or not, it’s a board rule that we can’t make fun of the Toronto Maple Leafs specifically. NO JOKE. > > It’s all because of me - I’m sorry that my rude behavior in 2012 spoiled it for everyone else. :o > > Quote from the past: No, that’s because you kept following him around, talking about the Leafs in threads when in unrelated threads. Especially Phil Kessel, for some reason. (BTW, [Kessel says hi!](https://www.bardown.com/phil-kessel-rubs-his-success-in-haters-faces-with-perfect-meal-out-of-the-stanley-cup-1.830107)) ---
**Author:** ![LC\_Strawhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@LC\_Strawhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LC_Strawhouse)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2019, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/28 "2019-10-13T23:58:04Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > No, that’s because you kept following him around, talking about the Leafs in threads when in unrelated threads. Especially Phil Kessel, for some reason. (BTW, [Kessel says hi!](https://www.bardown.com/phil-kessel-rubs-his-success-in-haters-faces-with-perfect-meal-out-of-the-stanley-cup-1.830107)) Uh… whoosh? Obviously, I was joking about it being a “board rule”, I just thought it was hilarious that Leaffan is still siccing the moderators on people who are mean to the Leafs. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/29 "2019-10-14T00:59:35Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > There’s no group being attacked, **tom**. It was a comment about one person’s appearance. Explain that to the various women who have felt threatened because too many men do not seem able to refrain from commenting on the appearance of women when the topic has nothing to do with appearance. And dropping a single male into the group about whom irrelevant appearance comments are made does not change the dynamics of the overall situation. _[shrug]_ ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/30 "2019-10-14T01:23:04Z")
That surely is a nice, narrowly defined group of people; well done. :rolleyes: ETA: Also, who are you (or **Chronos** , for that matter) to tell me what my thread is about? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/31 "2019-10-14T02:29:16Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > ETA: Also, who are you (or **Chronos** , for that matter) to tell me what my thread is about? Your thread can be about whatever you would like it to be. I have made no attempt to dictate how the thread should be determined. We let Creationists, Moon Hoax advocates, Truthers, and all sorts of people start threads, here. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/32 "2019-10-14T02:36:39Z")
Sure you did, when you called something irrelevant". Who are you to tell me what’s relevant or not in my thread? ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/33 "2019-10-14T04:07:43Z")
Says moderator right up there by his username. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/34 "2019-10-14T13:12:09Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Sure you did, when you called something irrelevant". Who are you to tell me what’s relevant or not in my thread? OPs do not own threads. With some narrow and occasional exceptions, they do not control what can or cannot be posted, or the direction a thread takes. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/35 "2019-10-14T13:48:25Z")
The Positive Gun News thread calls out that lie. Oh, wait, that’s the thread that exists “With some narrow and occasional exceptions”. I maintain the position and would like a public acknowledgement that talking about aesthetics is not out of bounds. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/36 "2019-10-14T13:59:06Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > The Positive Gun News thread calls out that lie. Oh, wait, that’s the thread that exists “With some narrow and occasional exceptions”. > > I maintain the position and would like a public acknowledgement that talking about aesthetics is not out of bounds. Lie? No, that’s why I put in room for exceptions, because the exceptions exist. The Gun News thread is hardly the only example. There have been other threads where the OP has asked for, and has been granted, a narrow focus. Any thread that says “No spoilers”, for example, would be an exception. However, the vast majority of threads do not have that exception and OPs do not have control over what’s allowed and what is not. So Positive Gun News thread notwithstanding, OPs do not control their threads. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/37 "2019-10-14T14:32:22Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > The Positive Gun News thread calls out that lie. Oh, wait, that’s the thread that exists “With some narrow and occasional exceptions”. > > I maintain the position and would like a public acknowledgement that talking about aesthetics is not out of bounds. As my late father would have said, “it don’t hurt you to want. Tell you what…want in one hand, and shit in the other. See which one fills up first.” In other words, while you’d _like_ a public acknowledgement, it ain’t happening. ---
**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:** [October 14, 2019, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/38 "2019-10-14T14:50:21Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Saying someone has a porn star mustache is not the same thing as saying someone looks like they are a pornstar. Which of those two do you think “look like an understudy in a porn video?” would be? ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/39 "2019-10-14T15:08:39Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > To be clear: I got a report on that thread (multiple reports, actually), I checked and saw that there was indeed a problem, and I dug down to the root of the problem. If the post about the moustache were the entirety of it, I probably wouldn’t have even posted any note at all (because it did not, as I said, violate any rules). Given that I was commenting on other aspects of the situation, however, I felt it necessary to comment on that post as well, and to acknowledge that it was, in fact, a hijack. So…if I’m reading this right, the post about the mustache did not, as you said, violate any rules. The other thing you commented about in that post was the Jr Modding and personal insults. Sounds to me like the insults and Jr Modding should have been noted, but the original comment shouldn’t have been since, again as you said, it didn’t violate any rules. If we’re going to note/warn people because they say something that doesn’t rise to the level where it violates board rules, we might as well change the rules. It’s like a cop pulling someone over and warning them that they’re going 54 in a 55 zone and they’re almost speeding. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2019, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717/40 "2019-10-14T15:12:47Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Explain that to the various women who have felt threatened because too many men do not seem able to refrain from commenting on the appearance of women when the topic has nothing to do with appearance. > And dropping a single male into the group about whom irrelevant appearance comments are made does not change the dynamics of the overall situation. As I see it, the problem with commenting on the appearance of women isn’t with commenting on their appearance _per se_, but with sexualizing them, when the topic has nothing to do with them as sex objects. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-this-is-not-an-inappropriate-comment/841717.md?page=3)