Personal attack on a smug alarmist

Dear Chronos -Thank you for pointing out such egregious behavior. I accept that it is against the rules, but I think it was taken too far by slapping me with my first official warning that will stay on my SD record forever, this makes me sad. You could have politley told me to hush about the smug alarmist without dragging me down in such a manner. I’ve seen the mods do it before, gently wag their finger at a poster and then say “no official warning given” . I suppose you could have afforded me the same treatment, since I have never tussled or argued unfairly with any poster on this board beore, and have never been singled out for bad behavior by any mod since I joined in 2004.

Sincerely
Chela

"Dear chela,

You have received a warning at Straight Dope Message Board.

Reason:

Personal Insults

Personal attacks are not allowed in General Questions.

Original Post:
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=21997884
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
Yes. Are you suggesting that sinkholes are only dangerous in Florida?
Don’t be confused,you sounded like a smug alarmist with useless anecdotes for the situation. Because if your house was about to be swallowed you fucking scram before you dither on the phone with a request for a municipal inspection, not a 24/7 dept ymmfv.
Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum’s rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
Straight Dope Message Board"

Dear chela,

You’ve been here since 2004. Surely by now you should have been able to work out how to walk the Dope’s silly but rather clear lines regarding personal insults.

You wrote:

What you should have written was:

“Don’t be confused, your post sounded like smug alarmism with useless anecdotes for the situation.”

Happy to help!

In GQ that post could likely have been moderated as well. GQ has the lowest tolerance for snark and perceived jabs.

Your first and only warning in 15 years. Don’t sweat it. As long as you don’t have a consistent history of warnings, you should be safe. The mods do take prior behavior into account when giving out suspensions or bans. As long as you don’t make a habit out of it, you won’t be on their radar.

Sorry, wasn’t clear I was replying to:

Sure, it might have been. But it also might not have been, depending on the mod, the poster, and phase of the moon, and the position of the tea leaves.

I would have moderated it.

Yes, I used the conditional word “could”, since I didn’t want to speak in absolutes, but in GQ, a post like you constructed would likely have been modded.

Sure, that’s been made clear, but HOW would you have modded it, with an official warning or a mod note alerting me to the potential for a warning? I hardly think I’m on anyone’s moderating radar as it is, but act you must when a post gets reported - its how you respond that matters most imo. It pains me so that I ruffled NP’s feathers - thoughts and prayers to the injured party.

The post, as it stood, was far into warning territory, in my opinion, past behavior not really relevant. The adapted post that mhendo posted would have been borderline in most forums but warning worthy in GQ. Again I never moderated GQ, but that’s my perspective.

And to be clear, the post you quoted was referring to mhendo’s suggestion, not your original post.

That’s neither here nor there. The post was clearly in violation of the rules and subject to a warning. Just because you’ve seen a cop occasionally let someone off for going 58 mph in a 55 mph zone is no reason you’re entitled to insist that you don’t deserve a ticket for doing the same thing.

As has been said, one warning in 15 years is essentially a non-issue. Don’t worry about it.

Personally I would be more worried about what Mrs Sior wrote in my file back in 6th grade. But that could just be me. :wink:

Far into warning territory? Really? I feel so ignorant of your standards right now.

It’s because it was in GQ. GQ has always had much, much higher standards than the other forums. You can’t even make jokes until the question has been answered.

No wonder you’re unemployable. :frowning:

I should report that thread for a forum change to IMHO, as it’s full of opinions and anecdotes and no expert here can factually address the issue in question.

You’re upset you were warned for that post?

THat’s the post I was warned about, you sound a bit incredulous about the warning, if I read your implication correctly. It is what it is man.

Why didn’t you report it then? In any case, although there were some factual responses, your own post didn’t come anywhere near being one of them. I would also note that although you profess to be embarrassed or distressed about the warning, you seem to be determined to bring as much attention to it as possible.

Reread what I wrote please, I said it made me sad. Embarrassed and distressed is you projecting about my motivations. SOmedays I deserve a little attention what’s it to you anyway?