# Pit rules have been revised **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256 "2009-02-24T19:34:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![MadPansy64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/dc4da7/32.png) [@MadPansy64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MadPansy64)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/201 "2009-02-24T22:45:55Z")
Mr. Zotti, While I very rarely participate in The Pit, and have no comment on most of the changes to the board in general, I must say I am extremely distressed by the reasons. Why do you not just come right out and say that you do not want paying members? You want guests, who see the ads, and the advertisers money. You don’t want ours, because those of us who pay to post circumvent your business plan. I’m all in favor of profit, but I’ve never been a fan of BS. You’re peeing on our shoes, telling us is raining, and are offended because not everyone is happy about it. Honesty would have a side effect of reducing those tiresome pay-to-posters who spend most of their time shrieking about being “a paying customer.” ---
**Author:** ![SoulFrost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f07891/32.png) [@SoulFrost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SoulFrost)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/202 "2009-02-24T22:47:15Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > Several people have said that my comment about “we knew there’d be some overreaction” was read as condescending. I apologize, it wasn’t meant that way. I apologize and retract the statement. Condescention (however the heck it’s spelt) was certainly not intended. > > I also have to say that I’m delighted by this. A week ago, if I had posted in defense of board policy changes, I would have been attacked in the Pit, with comments made about my parentage and references to various improbable sexual practices. I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, and thus I would not have even known that I had misspoken. So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. Sooooo… if you (and other Staff) never read the Pit comments–or even know they exist–why the hubbub about all the abuse heaped upon you there? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/203 "2009-02-24T22:47:29Z")
[Condescending voice] It’s spelled condescension [/condescending voice] ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/204 "2009-02-24T22:48:42Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > [Condescending voice] It’s spelled condescension [/condescending voice] You’re not very good at condescension. You should sign up for my asshole class. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/205 "2009-02-24T22:48:56Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. (\*Pssst. \* **Dex**. We’re not in the Pit. It was never OK to insult a mod here. Or anyone else, for that matter.) ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/206 "2009-02-24T22:49:35Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, … Who’s been posting under your name in the Pit? ---
**Author:** ![DudleyGarrett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DudleyGarrett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DudleyGarrett)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/207 "2009-02-24T22:49:38Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > (\*Pssst. \* **Dex**. We’re not in the Pit. It was never OK to insult a mod here. Or anyone else, for that matter.) And Dex… your fly’s open! ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/208 "2009-02-24T22:51:05Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > Several people have said that my comment about “we knew there’d be some overreaction” was read as condescending. I apologize, it wasn’t meant that way. I apologize and retract the statement. Condescention (however the heck it’s spelt) was certainly not intended. I’m trying to imagine what your intention could have been, then. > [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > I also have to say that I’m delighted by this. A week ago, if I had posted in defense of board policy changes, I would have been attacked in the Pit, with comments made about my parentage and references to various improbable sexual practices. I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, and thus I would not have even known that I had misspoken. So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. Way to miss the point. Almost no-one here is complaining about Rule #1, regarding placing discussions of board policy in ATMB. That’s a non-issue for most people. The one that has people pissed off is Rule #2. Have you really read this whole thread and not understood that? ---
**Author:** ![ChadVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7ba0ec/32.png) [@ChadVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChadVader)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/209 "2009-02-24T22:53:23Z")
This really doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. I mean why not just make a new forum “Alternative Pit” with the new rules? Then just leave the old one alone. Is the message board gonna explode if you add one more forum? Also this would be a way to prove your point without taking such an iron fisted approach. If people actually agree with you then they’d start using the new one and the old pit would eventually die. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/210 "2009-02-24T22:59:03Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > Several people have said that my comment about “we knew there’d be some overreaction” was read as condescending. I apologize, it wasn’t meant that way. I apologize and retract the statement. Condescention (however the heck it’s spelt) was certainly not intended. > > I also have to say that I’m delighted by this. A week ago, if I had posted in defense of board policy changes, I would have been attacked in the Pit, with comments made about my parentage and references to various improbable sexual practices. I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, and thus I would not have even known that I had misspoken. So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. I will take you at your word that you did not intend it that way. However, I’m hard pressed to understand how you could not have anticipated that it would be. It’s the very model of a condescending attitude. Lesson hopefully learned, though. As for the second - the issue that we’re (mostly) taking umbrage with, is the rule number 2. The rule moving all issues about moderation to ATMB wasn’t generally complained about. (or, what **mhendo** said. ---
**Author:** ![BubbaDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bubbadog/32/333_2.png) [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/211 "2009-02-24T23:02:53Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > Several people have said that my comment about “we knew there’d be some overreaction” was read as condescending. I apologize, it wasn’t meant that way. I apologize and retract the statement. Condescention (however the heck it’s spelt) was certainly not intended. > > I also have to say that I’m delighted by this. A week ago, if I had posted in defense of board policy changes, I would have been attacked in the Pit, with comments made about my parentage and references to various improbable sexual practices. I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, and thus I would not have even known that I had misspoken. So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. Amazing - your apology about condescending comments is itself condescending. Don’t worry though. You’re safe from reprisals. The pit’s been neutered and sedated. But I didn’t come here to squabble with **Dex**. Many times I appreciated his guidance and input. What I did come to ask is that somebody with a good video camera please get a good shot of the Pit clearing the shark tank and put it on Youtube. My camera sucks. (can I say sucks?) ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/212 "2009-02-24T23:03:12Z")
> [@MadPansy64](#): > > Mr. Zotti, > > While I very rarely participate in The Pit, and have no comment on most of the changes to the board in general, I must say I am extremely distressed by the reasons. > > Why do you not just come right out and say that you do not want paying members? You want guests, who see the ads, and the advertisers money. You don’t want ours, because those of us who pay to post circumvent your business plan. > > I’m all in favor of profit, but I’ve never been a fan of BS. You’re peeing on our shoes, telling us is raining, and are offended because not everyone is happy about it. > > Honesty would have a side effect of reducing those tiresome pay-to-posters who spend most of their time shrieking about being “a paying customer.” Bingo! This is the nub of it: obviously **Ed** welcomes with open arms a goodly number of Pit fans going “Oh, fuck this noise, I’m gone,” and letting their subscriptions lapse. He’s all but told us “Hey, if you don’t like it, go. Now. Please. We don’t need your ass in here, thanks for all the good times, buh-bye, now.” If we continue to hang around, it will be as guests, not members or charter members or anyone else playing a nickel to post here. \*\*Ed \*\* is not a stupid man. Insensitive, and condescending, and erratic, and incompetent at managing a meat market, and several other undesirable qualities I could list (but won’t on account of I don’t want to insult the man, and get my own ass banned today) but he is not stupid. So let’s assume he wants to turn us all into non-subscribing viewers of ads. This will be hard, frankly, because someone decided years ago to promise us Charter Members a lifetime subscription for literally pennies per week (around 15 cents, I think) and now maybe someone has smacked his forehead and gone “Oh, no! Colossal brainfart!! How can I make these freeloading, non-ad viewers voluntarily revoke their own lifetime $0.15/week subscriptions? I know. I’ll institute some really REALLY stupid rules, and they’ll quit the SD, and everybody wins!! Yay, me! Brilliance triumphs yet again!!!” Does this make sense to anyone? ---
**Author:** ![Grossbottom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ba8739/32.png) [@Grossbottom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grossbottom)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/213 "2009-02-24T23:05:52Z")
> [@ChadVader](#): > > This really doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. I mean why not just make a new forum “Alternative Pit” with the new rules? Then just leave the old one alone. Is the message board gonna explode if you add one more forum? Also this would be a way to prove your point without taking such an iron fisted approach. If people actually agree with you then they’d start using the new one and the old pit would eventually die. Because no one will post in Aunty Ed’s Gay Tea Time: Le Pitte as long as they can post/read the old Pit with **Giraffe** , and these changes aren’t about what the readership wants. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/214 "2009-02-24T23:06:26Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > I have never before posted a message of this kind, but I find this change in the rules, with regard to acceptable content between posters in the Pit, to be foolish and misguided. (I don’t have a real problem with restricting discussion of Board policy to ATMB.) > > There was not previously a problem; there is no point in this solution, and it will make life difficult for everyone involved. > > The proposed distinction between what insults will and will not be allowed is vague and unworkable, and will serve to create more numerous and unpleasant arguments than it will prevent. > > I urge the moderators in the strongest terms to reconsider these rules. I agree with matt. And I’m not one to criticize the boards–on the contrary, I’ve defended board policy even when folks were being repulsively nasty in their insults to me for doing so. This change is an overreaction, guys. Prohibit insulting mods and admins, fine. But limiting “fuck you”? Sometimes when someone is being an asshole in Great Debates, there’s nothing more than needs to be said. I very rarely pit someone, but when I do, I want to have the tools at my disposal. Eliminate nasty personal jibes, sure. Eliminate death threats or e-weener waving, no problem. But eliminating “fuck you”? You gotta be kidding. Please reconsider. Please at least indicate taht you’re taking this response from board users seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/215 "2009-02-24T23:07:20Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > Several people have said that my comment about “we knew there’d be some overreaction” was read as condescending. I apologize, it wasn’t meant that way. I apologize and retract the statement. Condescention (however the heck it’s spelt) was certainly not intended. Good. I want to point out that I never overreact. My reactions are exact, perfectly calibrated, and precisely calculated. They are positively Newtonian in their equalness to the initial action. I react promptly, properly, powerfully, and punctiliously. My reactions stop on a dime and give nine cents change. I do not overact, nor do I emote, hyberbolize, exaggerate, ham it up, or blow it out of proportion. I refuse to overstate, overemphasize, overstress, overstep, or overdo. I am always part of the solution, never part of the problem or the precipitate. When you bang on the knee of my reaction, my foot does not fly up and hit the doctor in the face. I achieve the intended orbit. I do get me my satisfaction/I do get my girl reaction/'cause i try and i try and i try and i try. Is that sufficiently creative for you? > [@](#): > > I also have to say that I’m delighted by this. A week ago, if I had posted in defense of board policy changes, I would have been attacked in the Pit, with comments made about my parentage and references to various improbable sexual practices. I would not have seen such comments, because I wouldn’t go to the Pit to read them, and thus I would not have even known that I had misspoken. So, I think, all in all, this is a very positive thing. Comments have been made in a civil manner, and I can respond to an error on my part and apologize. I see very few if any people complaining about the inability to abuse mods. This is a strawman. The complaints are that creative insults are bound to become indistinguishable from abuse, and that such a rule is impossible to define or enforce. That’s the issue you need to address. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/216 "2009-02-24T23:09:25Z")
> [@](#): > > …Does this make sense to anyone? Hard to say. In comparison to what? The proposed rules don’t make sense, they cannot be defined in any meaningful way, and a rule without definition is merely a pretense for arbitrary enforcement. The invitation for posters to be creative in their abuse favors the articulate needlessly. There are several posters here who are intelligent and perceptive but can’t write for sour apples, this rule therefore needlessly favors the “English major” mindset. Oh, bv the way, “there are rules for war”? How’s that working out? Best as I can tell, its only offered a pretext for hanging the losers. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/217 "2009-02-24T23:15:47Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > Define “abusive.” “Similar to a bus.” ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/218 "2009-02-24T23:15:50Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The invitation for posters to be creative in their abuse favors the articulate needlessly. There are several posters here who are intelligent and perceptive but can’t write for sour apples, this rule therefore needlessly favors the “English major” mindset. Wait a second…so by that logic I have an unfair advantage. I have to think about this a second. Nah. I’ll still get my ass kicked too often. ---
**Author:** ![MadPansy64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/dc4da7/32.png) [@MadPansy64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MadPansy64)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/219 "2009-02-24T23:17:23Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Hard to say. In comparison to what? The proposed rules don’t make sense, they cannot be defined in any meaningful way, and a rule without definition is merely a pretense for arbitrary enforcement. \ PRR isn’t asking if the _rules_ make sense, he is asking if his and my theory for the \*reason \*for the new rules make sense. > [@MadPansy64](#): > > Mr. Zotti, > While I very rarely participate in The Pit, and have no comment on most of the changes to the board in general, I must say I am extremely distressed by the reasons. > > Why do you not just come right out and say that you do not want paying members? You want guests, who see the ads, and the advertisers money. You don’t want ours, because those of us who pay to post circumvent your business plan. > > I’m all in favor of profit, but I’ve never been a fan of BS. You’re peeing on our shoes, telling us is raining, and are offended because not everyone is happy about it. > > Honesty would have a side effect of reducing those tiresome pay-to-posters who spend most of their time shrieking about being “a paying customer.” > [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Bingo! This is the nub of it: obviously **Ed** welcomes with open arms a goodly number of Pit fans going “Oh, fuck this noise, I’m gone,” and letting their subscriptions lapse. He’s all but told us “Hey, if you don’t like it, go. Now. Please. We don’t need your ass in here, thanks for all the good times, buh-bye, now.” If we continue to hang around, it will be as guests, not members or charter members or anyone else playing a nickel to post here. > > \*\*Ed \*\* is not a stupid man. Insensitive, and condescending, and erratic, and incompetent at managing a meat market, and several other undesirable qualities I could list (but won’t on account of I don’t want to insult the man, and get my own ass banned today) but he is not stupid. So let’s assume he wants to turn us all into non-subscribing viewers of ads. This will be hard, frankly, because someone decided years ago to promise us Charter Members a lifetime subscription for literally pennies per week (around 15 cents, I think) and now maybe someone has smacked his forehead and gone “Oh, no! Colossal brainfart!! How can I make these freeloading, non-ad viewers voluntarily revoke their own lifetime $0.15/week subscriptions? I know. I’ll institute some really REALLY stupid rules, and they’ll quit the SD, and everybody wins!! Yay, me! Brilliance triumphs yet again!!!” > > Does this make sense to anyone? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/220 "2009-02-24T23:19:04Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > “Similar to a bus.” a-busive Someone who doesn’t believe in things that are similar to busses. Sheesh. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256.md?page=12)