Are you kidding? I’m going to go look up all the archaic meanings of words that I can think of and make a list. Next person who calls me nice is getting reported for abuse so fast it’ll make my mouse spin. If someone suggests a thread I started is in the wrong forum – ABUSE! If someone disagrees with my opinion --SLANDER! ABUSE of my character! I’d hate for the rules to be applied haphazardly and better safe than sorry, as they say.
Quoting all of this because I don’t think Dead Badger’s post is getting the attention it deserves. I’ve never been a moderator of a message board, but my concerns regarding the rule changes correspond precisely with his experience.
I really can’t see how implementing Rule #2 (the one everyone is talking about here) can do anything except render the Pit into a poorer version of MPSIMS–except, unlike most threads in MPSIMS, the Pit would be meaningless and pointless. This is sad, as the Pit has always been one of my favorite fora here.
It will also make the Snarkpit–that “other” place, the very mention of which has caused much wailing and gnashing of teeth here–the de facto Pit forum, whether you like it or not.
I’m not as alarmed as many here. I think moving complaints to ATMB should have been done long ago after I first proposed it.
As for Rule #2, I can see it just disappear off the radar. Pity the mod who has to make a decision each and every time. It is unworkable, and there is no real penalty unless you persist against a pertinent mod warning. I can handle that. I can’t see it modifying my responses in the pit.
We will all be back to normal in no time.
However I do wish to say that any poster who reports a bad post in the pit is a (lets see) uh…traitor .
I’m aware of that. It’s not a question of money; it’s a question of time, attentional resources, stress, and goodwill.
Okay, I’ve figured out why I had the confusion from before: I simply don’t have much investment of any kind in the Pit. I read there, sure, but I rarely post there, nor do I generally bother to read threads that deal with other posters. I don’t see the Pit as a significant part of why I enjoy the SDMB, nor do I think the changes there reflect any kind of “slippery slope” or anything that’ll affect other areas.
This is not, of course, to demean those for whom it IS a significant part of their experience. I’ve got plenty of friends with hobbies and opinions I don’t understand. I just think that’s where my personal disconnect comes from, and I hope that this whole controversy won’t cause too much lasting damage.
Just to derail a little, speaking “english” english as opposed to 'Merican I see a big difference between you’re ass (synonomous with “you’re a dumb mule”) and your’re an arsehole, which means you are the end of an ailmentary canal 
Anyway, I think what’s ultimately going to happen here is that the boards are going to return to the condition they were that originally necessitated the Pit in the first place, and this rule is going to be retconned out of existence. Because what we’re going to see is not merely an increase in warnings handed out in the Pit, but an astronomical increase in, well, pretty much every other forum on the boards. People are going to get pissed, like they always do, and they’re going to want to get back at the person who pissed them off. Up until today, they could just take the person they’re pissed off at to the pit, and call him whatever names they feel applicable, and that’d be that. But that’s not an option anymore. At all, apparently, given Ed’s most recent post here, which seems to rule out any sort of pitting at all, no matter how witty. Their only option is going to be to engage them in the thread that pissed them off. raindog and Dex’s misrepresentations to the contrary, they’re not going to just start screaming “Cunt!” at them. They’re going, instead, to be as insulting as they can without explicitly breaking the rules. And it works, and whoever they’re trying to insult gets pissed off, and does the same back to them, turning up the heat just a little bit. And the first poster does the same, and it goes back and forth, until someone crosses the line explicitly, and an poster who otherwise would have been in good standing racks up a mod warning. And this happens, over and over, until we start seeing valuable posters banned for violating the rules. Which is a shame, because it’s a situation that could have been avoided if we’d had a forum where they could just go and cut loose on each other without fear of bring down the banhammer. A place like the Pit used to be, until today.
That’s what’s going to happen sooner or later. The tragedy is the casualties the board is going to take between now and then, because someone who’s not a member of these boards, who doesn’t understand the culture, comes in and starts dictating to us how we should be acting, with no regard to what anyone who actually uses this board wants out of it.
Y’know, I’m not a constant complainer either. Nor am I a regular pit denizen; oh, I’ve started a few pittings, but to my recollection they’ve usually been of outside people or events. I’m generally a nonentity who’s never been warned or pitted or probably even much noticed except for being so damn longwinded. So technically speaking, I probably should just raise my shoulders and go ‘meh’ to the new rules. Hey, I never use the c-word anyway 'cause I’m too squeamish! The anti-abuse rule won’t affect me and that’s all that matters, right?
And yet I love reading the pit and having it around and available should I suddenly decide to spew some venom. So you can count me among the throng who thinks these rules are ridiculous. Yes, even the one that says you can’t pit moderators qua moderators – I just can’t believe that mods are such delicate geniuses they can’t handle invective, or that they’re doing such a ‘dangerous job’ they deserve our hushed, awed obeissance. They’re not cops in the line of duty, for God’s sake. That said, after the “don’t use obscenities in thread titles” rule (the only one I think is perfectly reasonable), it’s the rule I think is probably most liveable.
But the infamous Rule #2 is a whole 'nother ball of wax. No one, not even Ed or his most passionate defenders, can tell me what was wrong with how the pit was working. They keep repeating that the rule abusers were actually rare. If we were managing to follow the rules as they existed, then the rules as they existed were fine. The mods, our beloved Giraffe in particular as the most active pit mod, were doing their jobs and the rest of us were having a good time being crotchety. It’s only been since you’ve created more and more arbitrary rules that people have started to chafe against them, and now you’ve gone and created even more. Well done! Nothing like adding a chilling effect to your already diminished membership.
BTW, I love, just love, the folks who rarely if ever post in or read the pit, who have nevertheless responded umpteen times in this thread about how awful it was and so in need of cleanup. I can’t help but think of some rareified 18th century dandy going out of his way to peek into a whorehouse while making a big show of covering his powdered nose with a perfumed handkerchief. “Oh I say there, aren’t these rough-tongued, benighted wretches just terrible? And they smell something foul!” All while continuing to take a long, deep whiff.
In the end I just don’t understand why y’all don’t follow this practical rule: Don’t like the pit? Don’t look at it. That’s what I do for the Chicago Dope stuff and, usually, IMHO and MPSIMS. (Sometimes I do post there, but I’m just not a huggles kinda gal.) Seems like Ed was content to use this rule himself for several years, and things managed to run without too many problems for nearly ten freakin’ years.
I don’t think it’ll destroy the SDMB altogether, like some, but quite a lot of the attraction and draw for me involves the freewheeling, few-holds-barred nature of the pit. I do feel like this has died. And it’s a damn shame.
Because he has recent history of banning/suspending people for violating rules no one knew existed.
Because of my aforementioned posting and reading habits, I’m not seeing why this is a significant factor. I don’t remember there being any sort of important amount of what I saw there that anything whatsoever to do with other posters. Maybe a fifth, probably less? The rest were generalized rants or towards outside sources.
Am I just mistaken? Or do you mean that having the option at all was a significant “cooling off” factor?
Okay, let me see… that’s probably an insult, assuming anyone does report a bad post, but may or may not be abuse, as (no offence meant to Bricker, it’s just that he’s been mentioned earlier in a similar example) it’s okay to say Republicans are stupid but not that Bricker is stupid for being a Republican, or to call him a stupid Republican (possibly, since that would be an insult but might not be abuse (ass and asshole being in different categories at least at one point) and it could theoretically make whoever happened to be modding at the moment laugh, which apparently used to count but doesn’t now but might again in the future), so calling “any poster” a traitor wouldn’t be abuse, but it’s probably an insult so in order to have it be okay The Flying Dutchman would have to introduce it as a pit thread so that it wouldn’t be an insult in ATMB.
I think I played a drinking game like this once.
Of course, all of that apparently wouldn’t be necessary to think about if this were the pit because these rules which suddenly desperately needed to be created will probably never have to be enforced because the situations which caused them to need to be created hardly ever happen so we should just relax.
Or not.
I started to compose a whole long post, but any points I have to make have pretty much been covered, so I’ll just try to leave it simple.
Speaking as another poster who’s been around for awhile(though not prolific at all due to a low post count), this sucks. This board was a lot better when Ed took a backseat to modding and only posted occasionally. Some of the best and funniest threads on this board would never have existed had we had rules like this all along.
I’ve never, from what I can recall, complained about any mod action, board outage, pay to post, or many of the other issues that have arisen over the years. But this? This is bullshit.
I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say this is the first nail in the SDMB coffin, but Ed, you are making this board suck, and you don’t seem to care. You’re driving away members, long and short term, and you don’t seem to care.
We have an MPSIMS. We don’t need another. Just close the pit if this is what it’s going to turn into.
This horrible new policy will be the ruin of the Pit and perhaps the entire SDMB. Since the Administration is apparently not going to solve this problem (they are the ones who created the problem) it is up to the Members to do something about this.
Perhaps we should consider a little mass civil disobedience. Maybe if everyone, all at once, started deliberately using so-called “abuse” in Pit threads–repeatedly telling other posters to “go fuck themselves, fucking cunt-lickers!” (or some such harmless fun) then we could force the Administrators to choose between either (1) banning all of us (and thereby leaving the SDMB a desolate, dried-up shell of its former self) or, (2) rescinding these idiotic new rules and putting things back the way they were.
Even Coca-Cola eventually figured out they had fucked-up with their crappy “New Coke” and returned to their old formula. Maybe once you guys get your head out of your… socks… yes! socks… (oooh, did I manage to stay inside of your silly lines? Did I play nice enough? Fuck! What is this, a fuckin’ church?) you could call the new, (old) Pit “BBQ Pit Classic” to try and save face.
But it shouldn’t have to come to civil disobedience… why not just suck it up, Ed, admit you are very wrong here, and make it right ASAP?
Exactly! That’s exactly what underlies all the anger and anguish that’s arisen over this terribly ill-considered fiat: The specifics, clarifications, and enforcement issues don’t matter nearly as much as the fact that these rules have already created a chilling effect of great but unmeasurable dimensions!
Teach a child to fear strangers and though they might be physically safer in the short term, they’ll be unable to deal boldly with the world when they mature. 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.
This must not stand. But as I warned a few days ago, it is simple human nature for decision-makers to strenuously resist revising their decisions once they’ve been made, no matter how much harm and resentment the decisions cause. If we cannot depend upon the enlightened minds of the Straight Dope to grasp this issue clearly, where else can we turn?
I wonder what Cecil Adams might say about all this…
sheepishly confesses that I came late to the party and haven’t read every post in every thread on this issue
Couldn’t we just have a mega-pit forum? Where the only ones that enter are members who sign on for mega-pit rules? And we can have a little barbecue pit symbol under our user names and only be allowed to pit other users with the same lil’ symbol beneath their names. Then we could cut loose in the mega-pit and no one would have to get all ass-sprained about it?
You know, I honestly don’t remember what it was about (and don’t remind me; whatever it was was water under the bridge years ago), but I do sort of remember writing that. Glad I could have the, uhhh, dubious honor of providing you with one of your favorite threads— errr, I think. :).
I am in a different time zone than most of you people. I am now well rested and had time to think about the changes. They still suck.
Rule 1. Not a bad rule. For years there has been some confusion about what types of threads go there and which go in the pit. However, it seems to me that most of the recent butthurt has been when mods act as posters using snark, insults and sarcasm. The warnings started when they were treated in kind. If questions about mod actions are required to be civil are the mods required to be civil. Are the days of mod warnings driping with snark over?
Rule 2. Retarded.
Rule 3. Meh. I was mildly in favor of this the last time it came up. Not sure why management has done a 180 on this.
Rule 4. Has this been a problem?
Rule 5. Stupid. Ignore lists should be to quietly ignore people. Not to throw it in their face and let them know you can’t hear them. Insults are out but taunting is OK. I don’t understand it. The old reason that was always given for this rule seemed valid. I’m not sure what the reason for this change is.
It looks like this thread is exactly what I thought it would be. Hands off by the management, ignore the opinions, let the children vent and it will blow over. Great business model.
You did, indeed, my friend. And like I said, we didn’t need Big Daddy giving out spankings for their idea of what’s insulting vs abusive, especially considering that as the recipient of said language, I felt neither insulted nor abused. You did what the Pit was designed for – let off steam after I lobbed a snarky reply to you in a non-Pit forum. Then we hugged, made up and moved on. This new rule is going to make it difficult, if not impossible, to do that in the future. I think that’s a shame, as the Pit really does (or did) serve a valuable purpose around here.
Yes. This reminds me of a bit from Bill Maher’s standup “The Decider”
Let’s do this thing.
Ah. This is abuse. You’re looking for room 12-A, right down the corridor.
C’mon people, the clearest sign of the dope going down hill is that in 300+ posts, NOBODY took up this great straight line.
In other news, after reading the fifth reference to “marquess of queensberry rules,” I decided I was going to have to look this up. (wiki) It turns out that it’s a set of boxing rules, invented in the mid-nineteenth century. I’m thinking it must have some other significance beyond “rules that make a fight fair,” because I’m not really seeing the analogy lining up that well. I’m guessing it also has connotations of civility and gentility. But even so, not a great analogy: it might have worked if the new rules were clearly going to be uncontroversial and universally welcomed.
Anyway, ignorance fought!