# 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:** 23
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/441 "2009-02-25T13:07:10Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > Ironically, the new rules would only have the Mods treating you like a child _when you acted like a child._ By your yard stick maybe. Not by others. Which is one of the main points of contention. I’ve only started a [pit thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=170640) once IIRC about another poster. I insulted them in it and rightly so IMO. I’d now be warned for calling that former poster a piece of shit. Now we have a situation where somebody can say the most vile thing about a non poster but we can’t tell them how we feel about them as we may hurt their feelings. Unless the mod/admin is amused by our comments or a myriad of other inconsistencies come into play. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/442 "2009-02-25T13:17:23Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > I don’t think you’d say “Fuck off” to a police officer giving you a ticket. You obviously have never been a police officer. I routinely take enough verbal abuse to make the strongest mod weep. ---
**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 25, 2009, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/443 "2009-02-25T13:32:02Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > You obviously have never been a police officer. I routinely take enough verbal abuse to make the strongest mod weep. This is one of the weaker elements in the whole “showing authorities proper respect” angle. My experience (and **Loach** ’s, though he is, I’m sure, far more imposing in his uniform than I am in mine, which ranges from jeans and a workshirt to a three-piece suit and tie, depending mostly on what’s clean that day) is that authorities suck up a lot of routine crap and learn to ignore most of it. I’ve had students threatening to fight me, I’ve had them sit in class and bark inappropriate sarcastic remarks, expose their genitals, and my first three responses are NOT to call Security and have them removed, but to try to remain unflappable and get my business done. It’s only the weakest, most unexperienced, newbie professors who go ballistic when their authority is challenged. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/444 "2009-02-25T13:44:33Z")
> [@](#): > > **Ed Zotti** said: > The one bright-line rule I could think of was no obscenities directed at other posters - that eliminates virtually all the problematic stuff from recent times I can think of. But it’s not that hard to imagine somebody coming up with (a) a gaspingly vicious comment that (b) isn’t technically obscene but (c) was sure as hell intended to hurt. That’s what “no abuse” is meant to cover. We don’t see that kind of thing too frequently. Is this kindergarten? I know cyberbullying was the big sensationalist news story of 2008 and all, but c’mon. The people who post here are supposedly old enough to know how to either not click on the BBQ Pit or close the browser window without getting all emotionally distraught over what someone on a messageboard says. Why all of a sudden does the BBQ Pit have to become the Baby Pool? And whoever said that ‘wait and see’ becomes ‘been in place too long to change now’ … that’s a kind of accuracy and honesty that’ll get you into trouble. > [@](#): > > **Loach** said: > You obviously have never been a police officer. I routinely take enough verbal abuse to make the strongest mod weep. So does the average kindergartener. The abuse you take would probably make them absolutely catatonic. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/445 "2009-02-25T13:47:27Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > Nothing in the new rules prevents “pugilistic debates.” That was a deliberate euphemism chosen because I _already_ fear arbitrary mod retribution for speaking out candidly, justifiably or otherwise. **This is precisely what the phrase “chilling effect” was coined to describe!** The fact that [certain unspecified-out-of-fear-of-punishment] credulous apologists for inconsistent and subjective authority [who cannot be named or challenged fearlessly] _still_ can’t grasp the essence of our position is just more evidence that [those-who-must-not-be-named] lack the insight and judgment necessary to create and enforce these new c-n-o-s-p rules in a just and fair manner. > [@raindog](#): > > But your post, like most of them in this thread, seems to be detached from reality. Good thing you didn’t direct that abusive insult to anyone in particular, just like a nice little a—t. (“Apologist” or “asshat”? _ **You** _ make the call…) > [@raindog](#): > > Eds not ripping out your tongue. If you can’t express yourself without calling your opponent filthy names, than maybe the SDMB isn’t as smart as we claim to be… That’s just more evidence that [certain unspecified-out-of-fear-of-punishment] credulous apologists for authority continue to be so utterly wrong-headed and out-of-touch. Rule 2 forbids “abusive remarks directed at other posters”, not just “filthy names”, an impossibly vague standard. But subsequently, it turned out that _amusing_ “abusive remarks directed at other posters” _might_ or _might not_ be judged with a different “standard”. As I responded to **Jenaroph** ’s post earlier… > [@Jenaroph](#): > > If I had an invective rant such as above in mind (though I don’t have nearly the vocabulary) and had to worry if “Bring it on, bitch” (possibly the mildest cuss in the whole thread) was over the line and might result in my banning, I’d likely say “Ah, screw it” and not post. I repeat: **Create an atmosphere of restricted speech where it was formerly open, and one effect will be a pernicious reduction of open communication of any kind. Such a loss will of necessity be invisible: A comment or statement not posted cannot be counted, but the loss and damage will increasingly accrue anyway.** ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/446 "2009-02-25T13:48:18Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > I’ve had students threatening to fight me [Minor hijack]Ironically, the only student who ever attacked me was one of my Law and Security students. That program was a dumpster for maladjusted wanna-be’s with “anger management” stamped on their foreheads. That fellow in particular never attended any classes, never completed any assignments, and never wrote any tests, but then came storming into my office and over my desk at me when he flunked. [/minor hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/447 "2009-02-25T13:49:04Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > And, we’re also saying: if this standard had been imposed in the past, there are only a small number of posts that would have been across the line into abusive and vicious rather than merely insulting. While I believe you, that this is the intent of the new rule, the rule as stated doesn’t reflect that. “Don’t direct obscenities or vulgarities at other posters - this includes everything from “fuck you” on up.” There are thousands of pit posts that include “fuck you” and worse obscenities and vulgarities, not just a few. I can understand wanting to tone down some of the more violently abusive attacks in the Pit, but there has to be a better way than this. Maybe if you just say that the mods will be sensitive to overly abusive posts in the future, and posters need to heed any requests to “bring it down a notch”. ---
**Author:** ![SomeUserName](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e480ec/32.png) [@SomeUserName](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SomeUserName)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/448 "2009-02-25T13:49:15Z")
> [@C K Dexter Haven](#): > > There are minimums standards of behavior everywhere else in the world. I don’t believe you’d say “Fuck off” to your children or grandchildren if they annoyed you. I don’t believe you’d say “Fuck off” to the librarian who told you your book was overdue. I don’t think you’d say “Fuck off” to a neighbor who asked to borrow a cup of sugar. I don’t think you’d say “Fuck off” to a police officer giving you a ticket. These are all people you’d like to go away and leave you alone, but you have other ways of communicating. All we’re saying is that you need to communicate to other posters without using abusive, vicious language. We’re not giving you a list of forbidden words, we’tr saying it’s all about context. This whole spew is stupid. You may not say “Fuck off” in those circumstances but if I was ranting about my sugar borrowing neighbor and how the bitch borrows sugar every damn day and someone came up to me and told me that I should not rant about said neighbor because they are one of gods creatures then I might indeed tell them to fuck off. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/449 "2009-02-25T13:56:01Z")
> [@Ed Zotti](#): > > Oh, dear. I was mostly being facetious. That’s the problem with discussions of this sort, when we’re dealing with abstractions - you get little sense of what the rule means in practice. So, you post a rule that is inherently contradictory. Then you post a “clarification” of that rule. Someone points out that your “clarification” makes no sense. Your response? “I was only joking!” If we are not to take even your “clarifications” seriously, do you understand our concern with your “wait and see what we do” suggestion? We are, or at least I am, trying to figure out what the fuck you are talking about, and what this rule actually will mean in practice. It would be helpful if you could respond seriously to serious questions. After all, this isn’t the Pit. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/450 "2009-02-25T13:58:12Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > But I would suggest that if everyone that has posted in this thread agrees not to read this board or post to it for 6 months, I can’t imagine the traffic going up. That would hit Ed in the only place he would acknowledge: his bottom line. Deal. See you guys in August. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/451 "2009-02-25T14:02:20Z")
> [@SomeUserName](#): > > Okay why was this [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=508121) closed? > > Lynn stated the reason the thread was closed is “Contests to see who can come up with the most creative insults have never been allowed in any forum.” Since there is no such rule, I expect it is simply an interpretation by Lynn of Ed’s dictum on insults to mean that we can not make non-abuse, non-profane, insults that are not directed at anyone. I have asked her to provide her cites: [Lynn, please provide cites for the rule you have asserted - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=508144) Bottom line? An amusing and inoffensive thread was closed due to a truly assinine rule, and an even worse intrepretation. ---
**Author:** ![Claptree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/58f4c7/32.png) [@Claptree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claptree)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/452 "2009-02-25T14:06:10Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > \ > There are minimums standards of behavior everywhere else in the world. I don’t believe you’d say “Fuck off” to your children or grandchildren if they annoyed you. I don’t believe you’d say “Fuck off” to the librarian who told you your book was overdue. I don’t think you’d say “Fuck off” to a neighbor who asked to borrow a cup of sugar. I don’t think you’d say “Fuck off” to a police officer giving you a ticket. These are all people you’d like to go away and leave you alone, but you have other ways of communicating. All we’re saying is that you need to communicate to other posters without using abusive, vicious language. We’re not giving you a list of forbidden words, we’tr saying it’s all about context. > > \ If I’m discussing something with a friend or a group of friends, disagreement is strong and he/she/they pull claims out of their asses, you can be damn sure I’d tell them to fuck off, and then some. I’d like to think we act in a more direct, honest and relaxed manner here than we do with people we interact with for 30 seconds once every month, if that. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/453 "2009-02-25T14:07:09Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I can understand wanting to tone down some of the more violently abusive attacks in the Pit, but there has to be a better way than this. Maybe if you just say that the mods will be sensitive to overly abusive posts in the future, and posters need to heed any requests to “bring it down a notch”. I actually wouldn’t have much of a problem with that. For the most part I would trust the mods to step in and give a standing 8 count when things get heated. There is no need for banning certain types of speech. I don’t see a problem with moderation (thats why we have moderators). Moderation not prohibition. ---
**Author:** ![TVeblen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@TVeblen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVeblen)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/454 "2009-02-25T14:13:29Z")
The Pit was the one place where it was possible to laugh at inept flamers. It was a refreshing alternative to most sites because rote obscenities were treated with mockery, not more matching obscenities. “Fuck you!” “Nuh-_huh_! Fuck _you_!” All these rule changes are way overkill. The thing that bothers me most is the nearly total lack of comprehension of how the board actually runs. All these prissy little rules were _expected_ to annoy a large number of posters but were enacted anyway. On second thought, never mind. **Loach** is right. It’s all a done deal and nobody is listening. Feedback wasn’t sought and isn’t welcome. It’s just a continuation of the Non-Pit Rules Apply fiasco. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/455 "2009-02-25T14:20:09Z")
> [@TVeblen](#): > > The Pit was the one place where it was possible to laugh at inept flamers. It was a refreshing alternative to most sites because rote obscenities were treated with mockery, not more matching obscenities. “Fuck you!” “Nuh-_huh_! Fuck _you_!” > All these rule changes are way overkill. The thing that bothers me most is the nearly total lack of comprehension of how the board actually runs. All these prissy little rules were _expected_ to annoy a large number of posters but were enacted anyway. > **On second thought, never mind. Loach is right.** It’s all a done deal and nobody is listening. Feedback wasn’t sought and isn’t welcome. It’s just a continuation of the Non-Pit Rules Apply fiasco. New sig. Thanks. It seems obvious what has gone on behind the scenes. The Admins are marching. They are very active today closing down threads and reining in the riffraff. But they have been very quiet. I wonder if there was a mod gag order from the admins. Very few posts by admins here. Almost no questions answered. No mods chiming in. Marley is usually very vocal with his opinions. I don’t always agree with him but he never hides. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/456 "2009-02-25T14:25:11Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > Oh, dear. I was mostly being facetious. That’s the problem with discussions of this sort, when we’re dealing with abstractions - you get little sense of what the rule means in practice. That’s why I ask everyone to give this some time and see how it works out. The point I was trying to make, none too successfully, was that context is important. The one bright-line rule I could think of was no obscenities directed at other posters - that eliminates virtually all the problematic stuff from recent times I can think of. But it’s not that hard to imagine somebody coming up with (a) a gaspingly vicious comment that (b) isn’t technically obscene but (c) was sure as hell intended to hurt. That’s what “no abuse” is meant to cover. We don’t see that kind of thing too frequently. Far more often, as you know from your own experience, we get colorful invective that was meant in jest or not aimed at anyone in particular. That’s not abuse and we’re not trying to stamp it out; that’s what I meant by my comment about making us laugh. We’re certainly not going to have a laugh-o-meter that determines who gets in trouble and who doesn’t, and I apologize if I gave that impression. I’ll refrain from any further facetious remarks of that sort in this thread. > > Please understand what I’m trying to do here. I’m trying to limit outbreaks of hateful, hostile behavior, which occur fairly rarely but often enough that they bother me. I think that’s a worthwhile and achievable goal. If it emerges that there’s some different way to phrase the rules that accomplishes the same result in a way people find easier to understand, sure, we can adjust the words. But truthfully I think it’ll be pretty obvious what I’m talking about once we let this run awhile. > > You’ll have to excuse me, I have other things I need to deal with, and probably won’t have much more to say on the boards tonight. Facetious or not, I actually found the comment encouraging. The success or otherwise of Rule 2 in particular is going to lie in the way it’s implemented by moderators. Your comment gave me cause to hope that it will be with a light rather than a heavy hand, and this, coupled with your further clarification of the sort of posts you’re trying to prevent, make me feel a little more optimistic. I think it probably best to give the new rules a fair wind and hang fire until we see whether they do indeed have a deleterious effect on the forum. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/457 "2009-02-25T14:31:22Z")
You know, I can see what Ed is driving at, but I think he’s trying to snuff a candle with a fire hose. All I know is that if someone insults me offensively enough in The Pit, with or with obscenities, I guarantee I’m not going to review the new rules before I unleash a hearty “go fuck yourself.” The chips will just have to fall where they may, I suppose. ---
**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 25, 2009, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/458 "2009-02-25T14:37:20Z")
I think the chips will fall largely depending on your posting history. I.e., if Poster A, beloved by all on the SD, slips and lets a “Fuck You!!” out, that will fall under the “We’re trying to be sensitive to posters slowly adjusting to these new rules” category, whereas if Newbie Poster B or Obnoxious Poster C does the same thing, well, they’ve been warned and should have known better, so buh-bye, and don’t let the door bang your ass on the way out. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/459 "2009-02-25T14:40:39Z")
Can I get around rule #2 as long as I use one of the shiny new spoiler tags? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256/460 "2009-02-25T14:44:06Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > The success or otherwise of Rule 2 in particular is going to lie in the way it’s implemented by moderators. Your comment gave me cause to hope that it will be with a light rather than a heavy hand, I’d said something more explicit back on February 19, FWIW. > [@](#): > > But I will say that I’m not looking to ban anyone. I don’t enjoy banning people. I’ve issued very few warnings, I’ve admitted mistakes, and I try to do things rationally and explain my decisions. I try to be consistent. I’m also not going to start handing out warnings or suspensions over surprise rules. If you think I screwed something up, let me know. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10848178&postcount=72](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10848178&postcount=72) That applies to the new rules, too. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pit-rules-have-been-revised/487256.md?page=24)