In this thread,Weisshund received a warning for this post:
The thread in question has been moved to the Pit. The OP himself did not receive a warning when he modified text in a quote, which is also a warnable offense.
I’d like to suggest that Weisshund receive equal treatment and simply receive a note. The entire thread is a train wreck. I don’t think that Weisshund was more deserving of the warning. The opposite, if anything.
Without saying whatever I think we can’t say, even in ATMB, I would just say it is always a pity when I see a good poster goaded into making a warnable post in a thread that is probably whatever that thing we can’t say is.
With that (not) said, I vote for rescinding the warning. But I also suggest that all involved in the thread think carefully before responding to an inflammatory OP made by someone who just signed up.
As an aside to the Mods, I think that we should be able to say that thing we can’t say in ATMB because it makes it kind of difficult to discuss the moderation of a rules violation in this context and almost all other forms of ‘junior modding’ are permissible here for that very reason. e.g. ‘that post was definitely a personal attack’, ‘that post was a hijack’, ‘that post was threadshitting’, but not 'that post was [thing we can’t say].
You’re right that the **Faylasouf **didn’t get a warning for changing the text in the quote box largely because they were new. Join date was 1 day old, and 100% of their posts in that thread. Typically I try to give newbies a break for not knowing all the rules when they are super new. **Weisshund **has been around since all of 2017 which after 4 months a person is more expected to know better.
I agree the thread was a bit of a trainwreck, and **Tom **did the heavy lifting of moving it. I had drafted a note to close the thread on three separate occasions throughout the day in between meetings at my other job but I ended up not doing so for two reasons. I’d rather avoid closing threads simply because the topic isn’t to my liking. To say it didn’t garner interest would be wrong since it received so many replies so quickly. My hope was that it would simply fall off. 2nd, in my mind I was hesitant to move a thread started by a new poster to the Pit if they were unfamiliar with the different rules there, and weren’t prepared for the type of responses they may get. Based on the later activity of the day I think moving it as Tom did was a good outcome.
So with that in the background, onto the matter at hand. I’m reluctant to rescind the warning. Again back to the FAQ:
Trolling as an insult is specifically called out as a special case that is verboten. As a result, it is one area that I feel we are compelled to act with less leeway than we would in other areas. Near any other garden variety insult and I would have simply issued a note.
That being said, from everything I can see, **Weisshund **appears to be a fine poster and board member, and I don’t think a single warning will be held against him/her. I know this specific instance wouldn’t influence my opinion by itself, and we all do vote on most matters of significance. There’s a mental weighting that goes on.
So I’m reluctant to rescind the warning, but I’ll inquire with the mod-loop and get feedback.
That’s fair, in my mind. I would also advise that, per her earlier post in this thread, Ivory Tower Denizen, seems to feel that his infraction was because he was defending her. Not that she needs it, of course. But I think intent should be considered, as well.
I haven’t been here long enough (few months) but I love the place. Weisshund has been extremely helpful and knowledgeable in many aspects, so if not out of place, I too agree with rescinding the warning. I believe the OP to be ignorant in that “Debate” thread, so much to the point that many of us bit our tongue, but strongly suspected the same as Weisshund did.
I hear what Bone is saying and everything that he says is accurate but surely a reprimand would have sufficed? It’s true that a warning isn’t the mark of Cain but on the other hand it isn’t a pleasant thing to be constantly trailing around after you either.
Giving the guy a break wouldn’t bring the whole edifice down.
Agreed. It’s very difficult to leave low-hanging fruit on the vine, and a lot of folks don’t even think about it; it’s not recreational outrage so much as recreational mockery.
There’s not much that can be done about that, but it does mean mods shouldn’t consider how many responses an OP has gotten when figuring out whether to shunt it to the Pit. Often the most thoughtful OPs don’t get much responses, as responding to them requires too much work.
I’m dubiously driven to inspect that thread for the first time, wearing disposable gloves. Although Weisshund was technically guilty, I agree that he deserves a break. At post #124 he lapsed into mistakenly following the conventions of a Pit thread; and that had long been the level of discourse in that thread in other respects.
Am I allowed to say that a hypothetical thread has the characteristics of potential trollery, because I’m talking about the thread rather than the poster? Anyway, it seems to me that if the mods choose to let a thread like that hang around for 3 pages anywhere other than the Pit, there should be some leeway given by way of Notes preceding Warnings if people inadvertently start treating it like it is a Pit thread.
Just wanted to point out that this sort of thing has sometimes not gotten a warning in the past. If the thread is like a Pit thread, its moved there, with no one getting a warning for pit-like behavior.
Mechanically it’s easy. Whenever I take action as a moderator I consider the potential future implications. Am I setting precedent, is this something that I would be comfortable doing consistently on a go forward basis. If questioned and under scrutiny is the action appropriate and defensible, etc. Hence, in that instance I was on the fence.
Well, **JC **had already weighed in that there was potential for debate and I agree with that. However wrongheaded a proposition may be, I think the best response is to demonstrate why it is so wrongheaded if possible, not by stifling discussion or by promoting derision.
That being said given **Weisshund’s **relative newness and the nature and circumstances of the thread in question and the comment that was being responded to, I’ll rescind the warning.