Except in some cases, kid A is actually Uncle Ernie and makes bullshit posts like “*n other words, then, I didn’t say it. I confess the two sentences were near each other.”
A bit of “do as I do” would go a long way.
You are the funny 
Perhaps I am misreading or simply do not understand the rule fully.
I have read threads titled “What other boards do you post at?” in IMHO. I have seen posters refer to specific threads on The Onion, Fark, StumbleUpon, a direct link in the Pit to the general site Operation Clam Bake, and of course weekly point and laugh posts at threads in Free Republic. It is safe to assume that a few of us post on some of those other boards as well and that this board is mentioned there occasionally. None of these result in a board war or even trolling of said boards although it’s more difficult to tell with Free Republic.
I am not trying to be disingenuous. It is my honest opinion that pretending a site does not exist to the extent that threads are hidden and members are warned for mentioning it merely gives that site far more power and attraction than the administration of this board wishes it to have. Ignore it, fine. Don’t comment on it if you think that’s the best policy. However that is not what is happening here. You’re not really ignoring it. The current mad rush to stringently enforce a rule for one site and one site only while blithely allowing others only serves to paints the administration of this board in the worst possible light.
In addition has no one moderating this site ever heard of the forbidden fruit syndrome? It is obvious the place pushes buttons. Why else would people be posting there?
Between warnings, new rules and character assassination of long term posters who have in the past been supportive of board policies but disagree with the new rules, criticism of board administration has become so difficult some find the ability to discuss these issues honestly near impossible. If they cannot discuss it here yet wish to have a discussion to obtain a real, honest answer, What else then is the recourse but to take that discussion elsewhere?
I strongly urge you to reconsider and loosen some of your more onerous restrictions. Stop with the character assassination as well; it’s beneath you. The site exists. It has existed for years and will continue to exist. People who post here post there. So what?
For one thing, it’s hypercritical of the moderation here and B: 99% of the posts are anonymous and there are some pretty vile statements and acusations posted on an almost daily basis. I can see the point of not linking to it, (especially since I just got WARNED!!! for doing so), but to not be able to even discuss it is beyond strange. It’s there. People here KNOW it’s there. It isn’t going away any time soon. As a side point, quite a bit of the posts are now centered on the new boards rather than here. I’d even go so far to say that the MAJORITY of posts are now about the othere sites rather than here.
I still like to snark on the snarkers.
Again: So what? Let 'em.
As for the ‘anonymous’ issue: Once upon a time this board was small enough that people knew the names behind the usernames. That ‘family’ feel carried over for a while. That’s no longer true. ‘Anonymous’ applies to the usernames here as well. As for the opinion that it’s cowardly to say something ‘anonymously’ that you’re not willing to say here, well… I tend to think that people say things anonymously because they’re no longer allowed to say things here. It likely hasn’t occurred to the kumbaya crowd who sanctimoniously insist they see no need for such nastiness or even for a Pit because ‘adults don’t need to engage in such behavior’, but if we still had the safety valve for ‘such behavior’ it would likely exist to a far lesser extent elsewhere. I have no problem telling someone exactly what I think of them, but if I am restrained from doing so because it ‘isn’t nice,’ then why should I simply not remove myself and have my say elsewhere? Frankly, I’d far rather say it to that person’s face and I think that hypothetical person would rather hear it directly from me as well. That, IMO, is what adults do.
While I agree with you, I also think that a lot of the snarkers are banned posters, and in some cases, LONG banned posters. Therefore, it isn’t as though they can come here and say it right out without sockpuppetry being involved. I’ve been here since Apr 2000 (with a few year absence recently) and I can remember when a lot of the posters new each other personally. Hell, I had a couple of mini-dopefests at my house. UncleBeer even came to one of them. I don’t see that any more. Perhaps the board grew too large or something but the tone and flavor of the board has changed drastically since I was last here. I think that a lot of people wouldn’t realize just HOW drastic the dhange has been if they hadn’t been away for a log time as I was.
I know…tldr, but my two pennies anyways.
None of those boards exist for the sole purpose of making fun of people here, which makes it a completely different situation.
This is one of the very few cases where snarky and cute would have worked well in Moderation. Seven’s thread deserved a rolleyes from the mods and a locking. By hiding the thread you are just drawing additional attention to it. Was anything said in that thread that could hurt anything or anyone? No, of course not. If anything, you could have gotten a name or two for the super secret mod database of people you didn’t know were snarkers.
Stink Fish Pot just proved that there is always someone who didn’t know about the snarkpit and I guess this is why TPTB don’t want any mention of it. I can understand that. Hiding threads, though, is not the way to distract attention from something. Quite the opposite.
And no, it was not trolling. It may have been all kinds of bad things but it was not trolling unless you are seriously twisting the definition.
Since somebody’s bound to take this literally, there’s no such thing.
You’ll forgive me for finding his assertion hard to believe. Like I said earlier, I don’t care if people snark or do anything else on other boards. The site’s on Google so it’s not a big dark secret. But if that stuff gets brought over here, it’s an issue for us over here.
That’s exactly what people with super secret databases say. 
GAME OVER, MAN, GAME OVER! Take the blue pill! 
‘That place’ (I feel like I’m discussing Voldemort) no longer exists for the sole purpose of ‘making fun’ of people here; you’re now a distant third. Congratulations. On the other hand at certain points it is also used to discuss matters that are considered over moderation or unfair moderation considering the fact that once a subject is deemed closed here it becomes taboo. If mentioned again, the person is (in this case) trolling. Let the character assassination begin. Seven has been here since 2000. Could it be that his disagreement with the current trend of rules is just that and NOT an attack on all ‘right thinking’ people?
As established early in this thread, there’s no need for euphemisms.
I had no idea we’d gotten so boring over here!
We give people a wide berth for feedback and complaints about moderating decisions and I think it’s one of the strengths of the site. If we feel somebody is here to do little or nothing except complain, it becomes a different matter.
Well, and this is my point. You can’t say “I don’t care” if it’s this obvious it pushes buttons. Say you don’t care and mean it. Ignore it. But don’t say “I don’t care” and then go about closing and hiding threads when it’s mentioned. In all likelihood the populace will make their own minds up about the posters who cop to posting at the snark board. They’re dancing up and down in their basements in glee just thinking of how they’ve got to you. Or bouncing up and down a little in their oversized chairs anyway.
For about the fourth time, Syntropy, I don’t care what people do on other boards, but if they bring it here - say, by starting a thread about it - then it’s an issue for us to deal with.
And for about the fourth time, Marley, if you go by that rule you’re being arbitrary. I totally understand that you don’t want to view it that way but if everyone else sees it that way but you and a small minority of people who also happen to be moderators (or brown nosers) you may want to consider that you may actually be wrong. For all that the moderators here insist that they realize they’re wrong occasionally there aren’t very many who actually back that up by admitting it when it happens.
You’re both talking past each other, so maybe a little analogy might be helpful.
It’s a Disney analogy. Yay!
There are a number of Disney hate sites out on the web complaining about the service people feel they received when they went to Disneyland or Disneyworld. Sometimes people have valid complaints about their experience, and something people had unreasonable expectations of what service could be like at a theme park.
As a corporation, Disney probably doesn’t care much about the existence of these sites. They may monitor them for valid complaints, but mostly if someone has a valid complaint, they can go to Disney directly and ask for redress. If people feel thwarted by Disney’s bureaucracy, they may go to one of these sites to vent.
So Disney doesn’t care what happens on these sites for the most part, but if any of these site tried to link to their site or tried to become an integral part of their advertising, Disney would likely care enough not to allow it.
You saying that SDMB is a Mickey Mouse operation?
/Puzzled in Puyallup
“Everyone” does not include you and a few other posters who agree with you. There are many people who post here who don’t necessarily agree with either “side” in the issue.
Ah, there you are DSYoung. I was afraid you’d been hung up. I did mention ‘brown nosers’ for a reason, you know.