Pit rules have been revised

[XJETGIRLX]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

Those things don’t happen often. The Pit will still be very much the Pit.

No, it won’t. The very purpose of the pit was to allow somewhere for posters to insult each other.

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

Basically, the mods are tired of putting up with abuse every time they take any actions.

Then they need to step down and pass the job on to someone new.

[Miller]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

On the question of no abusive remarks at other posters:
Well, we knew there’d be over-reaction. Look, we’re not saying you can’t insult other posters. We’re saying that there’s a line (however fuzzy.) “You’re a jerk” is acceptable; “Fuck yourself” is not. “You’re stupid” is fine; “You’re a cunt” is not. It’s a question of insult vs abuse. There is a difference, and it’s usually pretty clear. We’re not cutting out insults, we’re cutting out viciousness and abusiveness.

This is an absolutely meaningless distinction.

[Loach]

How about “You’re a big poopyhead”?

[Cervaise]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

Look, we’re not saying you can’t insult other posters. We’re saying that there’s a line (however fuzzy.) “You’re a jerk” is acceptable; “Fuck yourself” is not. “You’re stupid” is fine; “You’re a cunt” is not. It’s a question of insult vs abuse. There is a difference, and it’s usually pretty clear. We’re not cutting out insults, we’re cutting out viciousness and abusiveness.

With all due respect, this is a meaningless, ridiculous, and unworkable distinction.

Edit:

@Miller

This is an absolutely meaningless distinction.

See what happens, I type a few more words, and your post gets recorded first.

[TVeblen]

Just close The Pit down. The ineffable “tone” has been raised. We now have Slightly Edgy MPSIMS. Congratulations.

Just shut it down.

[Loach]

Just change the name to R.O. and be done with it. Let the Pit die quickly.

[Cervaise]

@Loach

Let the Pit die quickly.

Is this a death threat?

[Loach]

@Cervaise

Is this a death threat?

Gosh darn it. Change that to “Let the Pit go on a long enjoyable vacation that it decides never to return from”.

[SoulFrost]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

On the question of no abusive remarks at other posters:
Well, we knew there’d be over-reaction. Look, we’re not saying you can’t insult other posters. We’re saying that there’s a line (however fuzzy.) “You’re a jerk” is acceptable; “Fuck yourself” is not. “You’re stupid” is fine; “You’re a cunt” is not. It’s a question of insult vs abuse. There is a difference, and it’s usually pretty clear.

No, it isn’t clear. See the posts, here and elsewhere, by Giraffe, Poly, et al.

We’re not cutting out insults, we’re cutting out viciousness and abusiveness.

Are we going to define it? Sure, if someone would like to draft up the 700-page document… which would still not be fine enough. We’ve got along pretty well with “don’t be a jerk” without having to define “jerk,” we don’t see why we can’t get along on “don’t be abusive” without having to define it. It will depend on context, at a minimum.

We’ve always had limits on insults in terms of racism, sexism, etc. “You ass” is OK, “You nigger” is not. No one (well, only a couple of people) have any problems with this. The internal discussion amongst the mods has always been, it’s OK to duke it out, but there are Marquess of Queensbury rules.

“You ass” is ok, but “fuck you” isn’t? Those aren’t Marquess of Queensbury rules, those are arbitrary and contradictory statements.

Those things don’t happen often. The Pit will still be very much the Pit. We’re limiting what has, in the past, been a very small percentage of posts. And, please note, we’re very carefully saying that we’re not about to take serious immediate action on these.

They happen all the time. A very large number of posts and threads. I think you’re skirting the truth here.

The bannable offense is repeatedly failing to listen to moderators.

That’s always been the bannable offense. Check any “XXXXX was banned” thread for confirmation.

On complaints about moderator action:
We think it makes sense that if you have a complaint about a moderator’s action, you express it nicely rather than abusively or viciously. Basically, the mods are tired of putting up with abuse every time they take any actions. Criticism is one thing; abuse is something else.

Any Staffer who can’t take the reactions to their actions should quit. They don’t have what it takes.
Again, Ed… you associate too closely with these people. Stop listening to them.

[Crotalus]

@Miller

<snip>or should we all just go pound sand?

I think we can go ahead and start pounding.

[Jenaroph]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

Look, we’re not saying you can’t insult other posters. We’re saying that there’s a line (however fuzzy.) “You’re a jerk” is acceptable; “Fuck yourself” is not. “You’re stupid” is fine; “You’re a cunt” is not. It’s a question of insult vs abuse. There is a difference, and it’s usually pretty clear. We’re not cutting out insults, we’re cutting out viciousness and abusiveness.

So Cervaise’s classic telemarketer thread would have been out of line. I posted that as an example in one of the other threads and was wondering if it might be answered. Good to know.

…The Pit will still be very much the Pit. We’re limiting what has, in the past, been a very small percentage of posts. And, please note, we’re very carefully saying that we’re not about to take serious immediate action on these. The bannable offense is repeatedly failing to listen to moderators.

May I posit that, if so many posters are concerned about where the lines are when they’re attempting to come up with creative insults without getting too vulgar, then the Pit isn’t really very much the Pit? 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.

[MsWhatsit]

OK, I am trying to make sense of this; really, I am. But, “fuck you” is out; “you’re an ass” is in? WTF? Both of them use “Anglo-Saxon epithets,” both are insulting towards the other poster, but somehow one is abusive and one isn’t.

This is ridiculous.

[Tristan]

@Loach

. I expect that the opinions of the paying customers to be ignored.

Yeah, I have my own personal solution to this, in that this board will not be getting another dime of my money, given it’s current direction.

I expect this to be taken as a threat against the board.

[Hal_Briston]

Wait…is calling someone a “vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert” an insult or abuse?

[Cisco]

Serious question, Ed: Does it concern you at all that opposition to this is almost literally UNIVERSAL among the people who make up this place, and have been paying to post here and clicking on your ads for years, and in some cases a decade now? A messageboard IS its membership. Piss off the entire membership and you will literally end up with the online equivalent of a ghost town. Board software and webspace with no one using it. Please respond.

[wring]

@C_K_Dexter_Haven

(snip)
Well, we knew there’d be over-reaction. (snip).

I find this remark to be highly offensive on a personal level.

We are not children who need to be admonished or hushed, or preemptively ignored.

And I won’t really care if you meant it as a ‘general comment’ vs. personal. Just as I would be highly insulted by someone preemptively suggesting that any group that I belong to can be counted on to behave in an immautre fashion. It’s condescending in the extreme. Just as you fight (and rightfully so) to have your staff not abused, you should not abuse the constituents.

[Oakminster]

Ed, have you ever tried to watch Blazing Saddles when broadcast on network television? It sucked, didn’t it? Lot of the jokes don’t make any sense when sanitized for our protection.

You’re doing the same to the Pit. If you can’t live with it the way it is, just pull the plug.

[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.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

So the difference between “abuse” and insult" is basically profanity? If that’s the case, then just say so. If that’s not the difference, then you’ve clarified nothing.

Did some Creative Loafing suits get a look at some thread titles in the Pit and come down with the vapors? Is that’s what going on?

If we aren’t going to be given full freedom to vent in the Pit with a full range of emotion and vocbulary, then just shut it down. There’s no point in keeping it open.

I’m fine with a rule saying not to harrass mods or be abusive to them, but if we can’t tell each other to fuck off then there’s no reason for this forum to be here. It’s like changing the rules to say you can’t talk about movies or TV shows in Cafe Society.

I say this as someone who rarely Pits other posters.

[Crotalus]

I’m pretty sure that any non-laudatory reaction would have been characterized as over-reaction by the thin-skinned and judgment-deficient folks we seem to be dealing with here.