Is there a policy against pitting in obituary threads? Should there be?
[I raised this issue as a consequence of the Harlan Ellison obituary thread which seems to have turned into a pit against his sexual harassment.]
I suggest that the OP should identify whether they are opening an journalistic obituary thread or a eulogy thread. Then mods can take a redirecting stance when posters stumble in or refuse to respect the thrust of the intended discussion. They certainly are very different conversations, and those of us raised with the strict “Don’t speak ill of the dead” rule are certainly uncomfortable with too-contemporary dissection of the deceased’s accomplishments or moral compass.
There needs to be room for those who are mourning to express what they will miss without being placed on the defensive. There also needs to be room for frank discussion, or else what are we? But I don’t think those two discussions can intermix within [enter decent interval here] of the actual death.
Etiquette rules generally profess one year to be the decent interval. I think that is too extreme for the SDMB, and further that frank discussion could happen immediately, provided it carves out its own space.
The Op has a point. Basically what they are doing is threadshitting.
Look, I got no problem with rants over Harlan or any public figure, but in a thread “Why did you love Gilligans Island” a response of “I hated that show, so damn stupid, bad acting, pointless plots …” would be properly modded for threadshitting.
Same thing here is the purpose is a eulogy or memorial.
Here is a link to the thread in question.
It is my experience that bad-mouthing the deceased in an RIP thread outside The Pit is considered threadshitting. I thinkthis post would qualify.
Noting that a public figure committed sexual assault is hardly pitting them. Why shouldn’t it be mentioned in an obituary thread?
People were doing more then “noting” it. Did you read the post I linked to?
I did. It was a bit over the top but the poster WAS saying that Ellison sexually assaulted his mother.
Which means your claim that they merely noted the sexual assault is incorrect. That was a full on rant. It makes sense to have different criteria for hte two.
If it were just about some rumors about someone not connected to the poster, I would say that a rant seems out of place, though I would only recommend a note to start a new thread, unless it appears the poster was deliberately trying to start a fight.
But this appears to have been about an event that affected the poster personally–that their mother was raped by this man. I would find it extremely callous to tell that person that they were out of line for their very understandable, emotional reaction. As long as people don’t freak out about, I’d just leave it alone.
If a hijack starts over it, then I’d recommend a note saying to move the hijack to another thread. Particularly if it’s that hijack, the one that so often happens after any accusations of rape.
I would agree.
Oh good God.:smack:
My point is that the mods typically frown on that sort of thing. If the poster had only noted the issue, that would probably fly under the radar. A rant like that, not so much.
Wow. I don’t know anything about Mr. EllisOn and don’t have strong opinions about the question in the OP in general…but I am 100 percent with Emiliana here. The guy supposedly sexually assaulted a poster’s mother and we want that poster to shut up about it in a thread about the assaulter? Damn straight that’s fair game. If it were my mom I’d be shouting it from the rooftops too.
If someone dies, people will think about their life. If the life contains bad things, people will comment on them. Nobody minds when people say bad things about truly evil people, Like Charles Manson or Osama Bin Laden. Obviously Ellison isn’t truly evil but he could be an asshole and he did some shitty things, including sexual assault. Like** Ulf **said, I’d be doing the same if it was my mom.
Also, if Jacquernagy hadn’t posted his bizarre idea that grabbing breasts isn’t a form of sexual assault, there’d be a lot fewer posts about that aspect of Ellison’s life.
Because that same reason why you dont mention that Gilligans Island is a piece of shit comedy in a thread about how fun the show was. It’s called "threadshitting’.
Yes, we do want that poster to shut up abut it. That poster should start a rant (maybe in the Pit) about the incident. That thread was not the place.
“We?” Who made you king?
Also, the Thread title isn’t “What’s your favorite Ellison story?” It’s “Harlan Ellison 1934-2018.” Discussing bad things about him, like his reprehensible behavior around women, is in no way threadshitting. All aspects of his life are up for discussion.
The same “we” in Ulfs line "*and *we want that poster to shut up about it in a thread about the assaulter? "
No, it’s an *obituary. *You dont speak ill of the dead in a obituary.
It’s not an obituary. It’s a thread on a message board. And even actual obituaries will comment on the negative aspects of someone’s life.
That said I’ll wait for a mod to weigh in.
Watch the video of when it happened. Take it in context.
She touches him without permission, pus her arm around him*, she makes fun of him, they are very old friends and are acting out some sort of schtick. Yes, that was 13 years ago, and would be out of line today, but back then, it was actually considered funny. She laughed, the audience laughed. They were doing a act.
Harlan apologized even, after criticism.
- and why isnt that out of line?
There’s a link posted in that thread that indicates that someone close to the family found out that it was not a joke, the woman he grabbed was pissed about it, and in Harlan’s apology he admitted how wrong it was. Then he referred to his behavior as “puckish.” Which kinda negated the whole apology.