But, you’ll be happy to know I’ve branched out. I’ve actually been, you know, like critical of staff a time or two lately.
Still, as a teacher, I recognize that, for those who think that the height of fun is to make life miserable for them as are in power (mostly because their own deficiencies mean they are never going to be in power themselves), the fact that there are those who agree with them in power just can’t be born. So I take the term as a badge of honor, considering I consider the alternative to be the functional equivalent of excrement wallower.
Well, if your legal prowess is equal to your powers of deductive reasoning, I can certainly understand why you’ve chosen teaching. I don’t really see being in charge of an internet message board as ‘power,’ but whatever floats your boat.
I’d say I’m more along the lines of someone who prefers to see rules applied consistently and isn’t afraid to point out disparity when I see it. But then I fall more under the category of ‘those who can, do.’
Oh, wait, you didn’t touch me, because you didn’t even address what I brought up. You simply went for a trite joke. Whew! I was worried.
Pointing out disparity is fine. But casting aspersions at anyone who disagrees with you (e.g.: brown noser) in order to attempt to devalue their statements, rather than rationally discussing those statements does nothing for demonstrating your “powers of deductive reasoning.” Fortunately, as an attorney, I understood the difference between reasoned discussion of an issue and argumentum ad hominem.
Is this like that Karl Rove maneuver where you accuse your opponent of some lame action so that you’re then able to perform that same action without fear of remonstrance? Because really…if you’re going to insult someone, hiding it behind a smiley isn’t really all that subtle.
I understand that it’s important to you that everyone here know what you do IRL. I’m sure we’re all very impressed. I know I am. And the fact that you added Esq. to your username so no one misses it just in case they don’t read your posts? Not even a little needy or insecure.
As to the rest: I wouldn’t try to ‘touch’ you. Not even if there were such a thing as internet penicillin. I’m just a little bored of turning around and seeing you there every time I post. Please take your internet hardon elsewhere. It’s starting to verge on stalkery and it’s more than a little creepy. If you consider me beneath your notice then please, by all means…quit noticing me.
Quick question for clarification.
Is it correct that we can talk about the various splinter/spin-off boards if we don’t post links?
Are there specific boards we cannot post links to?
If so, which ones please?
I will only respond to the part about “Esq”, since that comes up at times:
When I started posting here, it was back in the AOL days. My AOL screen name was used for work, and since my clients (insurance adjusters, mostly) equated “Esq” with “attorney”, I added it to the screen name so that they would know who the email was from. But I never used it in my signatures. So my screen name here comes from that, and I’ve seen no reason to change it.
Except that didn’t happen in the thread you disappeared. It only happened in your head. The thread was a “Quote memes from the snarkpit” thread and was filled with such horrible trolling responses as “NO U!” or “I AM THE FRED COLLAPZOR” I’m sure sensitive dopers wept at the horror of seeing things like “I like pie!” or “First post, bitch!” but it’s not against any rules.
and again and again and again: you all have stated explicitly that it’s not against the rules to discuss other sites. I can pull hundreds of examples, including the specific rule laid down in the Pit where we’re point-blank told by a mod that it’s fine to discuss the snarkpit as long as you don’t link to it.
I squashed a big spider in the bathroom last night and didn’t kill it right off the bat–tell you what, even when it was trying to run away with only three functioning legs it was still considerably less lame than Marley’s attempted justifications. At least the spider got to stop eventually.
Wow. I thought the SnarkPit was just another way to refer to the Pit here. Not that it’s probably worth reading. Since it generally hasn’t been talked about as being distinct from the Pit since I’ve been on, and there have been a lot of guests joining since leaving pay-to-post, I propose that there are a lot of other people who don’t know about that place. Granted, few of the probably read ATMB.
Has this question been answered? I can’t seem to find it.
I ask because of this thread where someone is asking recommendations for other message boards. I replied without links to other boards including the splinter boards. Another poster gave direct links to his recommendations (not any of the splinter boards, but others).
And when did it change? As Giraffe specifically got permission to link to his site, which he does in his sig. Jim, I thought you had been given permission to do so as well.
Skip, is there a policy regarding threads such as the one I linked to, where folks are just asking opinions about other message boards to read? Is it okay to give direct links to other sites, and if any are ‘not okay’, which ones are they?
There’s no policy in a situation like that, and I (personally) don’t think there should be.
We ask that site and board promotions be cleared with us, first (which is true for all advertising, including charities and whatnot), but if someone’s asking, “Hey, what other sites out there might interest me?”, links would be fine.
I don’t really see being in charge of an internet message board as ‘power,’ but whatever floats your boat.