In this thread about the recent street murder, Stranger was moderated for (coming close to) attacking the poster.
Please note, I am not questioning the moderation. But more asking about the ‘attacking the poster’ part.
Is telling someone they are rude (if they have been), considered attacking the poster?
Both made it personal. That leads to issues. We try to head these exchanges off.
Please note steronz was also modnoted for the same thing. It was a 2 for the price of 1 note.
IMHO: Those that use weasel words effectively can get around the “attack the poster” rule.
Specific to your OP, some trollers here use the Johnny Somali method of posting just to get a reaction that violates the rules.
I’ve seen this approach every time. Not telling the mods how to do their job but I think the person that instigates, especially if they do it multiple times, should get a stiffer penalty than the person who gets frustrated and responds. Yes, you mods always say report the post but we are human and have human emotions.
That what?
Johnny Somali is a content creator whose only content is pissing people off on purpose then playing the victim. If you look him up, it’s a rabbit hole.
Seconded.
I started the thread and I thought Stranger was justified. The only thing that came remotely close to attacking the poster was
Perhaps you should learn some basic courtesy.
but personally I thought that was closer to being a factual statement than a personal attack.
Then so was steronz’s post about Stranger learning some brevity.
A factual statement can still be a personal attack. Personalizing discussion in an antagonistic way is being a jerk.
Disagree, that is much more subjective. For instance, I don’t think Stranger needs to learn brevity. IMHO, his posts are factual, informative and are not wanting for brevity. This post, however:
Is clearly taking a swipe and attacking the poster. Maybe Stranger was deciding what to post, maybe he was in the middle of something else or maybe he stepped away from the computer for a sec. Monitoring someone’s posting time and using it as an attack could be considered jerkish and that post, alone, could merit modding - in my opinion.
My post was over the line and I deserved the mod note if not more.
To the extent that the moderator intervention was a note rather than a warning, I didn’t really see a need to take public issue with it, but the implied equivalencing of the responses seems somewhat disingenuous. In that thread (and the post I linked to from another) I detailed the observations and details which I believed demonstrated that then oft-repeated claim that the shooter’s weapon was a Welrod-type pistol (and the misleading terminology and factually incorrect statements reported in news stories) was erroneous, and @steronz’s response was not to address those claims or critique the details but instead to attack my credibility and authority to post an opinion, first with oblique references and snide commentary that were clearly aimed at me (“internet rando”, “Internet sleuths”, “based on one man’s confidence”), and then the directive to change my style of writing posts (“Stranger, I see you’ve been typing for the last 10 minutes. Learn some brevity.”).
Now, I am not and have never been a moderator, nor am I privy to the internal discussions about how the rules are applied and adjudicated so my opinion on this issue is not informed, but those posts certainly seem like ‘jerkish’ behavior to me, and my response (“I see you’ve made five posts in one hour attacking my competence, tacitly insulting me, and now telling me how to post. Perhaps you should learn some basic courtesy.”) felt then and now like about the minimum of confrontation short of just not responding at all and letting @steronz continue to belittle me. I have asked for (and have yet to receive) guidance from the moderator involved about what the appropriate response should have been. I supposed I could have framed the response as a question such as, “Will you please show some courtesy?” rather than a suggestion but that doesn’t strike me as any less (or more) of an attack.
In any case, I didn’t really think it worth any ‘board drama’ or a need to pursue some kind of adventitious justice over the issue other than to avoid interacting with the poster in question in the future. And since we now have this thread, I’ll just take the opportunity to be slightly petty and point out that the weapon in question was not, in fact, a B&T VP9 or other integrally silenced pistol, but instead is now reported to be a striker-fired short recoil ‘ghost gun’ (likely a 3D printed frame with an aftermarket slide, barrel, and magazine) and printed suppressor (probably just the baffles inside of an aluminum tube) that repeatedly malfunctioned because of the suppressor (lacking a Nielson device or other ‘booster’) or just because 3D printed ‘ghost guns’ are inherently low quality and frequently malfunction.
Stranger
Was it an auto-loading weapon?
Stranger
I believe the answer to whether or not the gun was autoloading is “we don’t yet know.” Your article, and several others I’ve read that report on the criminal complaint filed in PA, does not specify anything beyond: black, 3d printed, capable of firing 9mm rounds, and accepts a Glock 6 round magazine. eta: and silenced, which isn’t in the picture but I think we can assume it.
I believe I have that correct but I welcome education.
Third image down in that article, captioned “This is an image of the ghost gun recovered from Luigi Mangione in Altoona, PA, law enforcement sources told ABC News.”
Stranger
This is ATMB, not the place for these posts.
This topic was automatically opened after 24 minutes.
Neither do I. That wasn’t the point.
I disagree. Subjectively.
I’m not saying Stranger wasn’t provoked (see the post immediately below yours), I’m saying it nevertheless was a personalized response to the provocation. A personal attack. Don’t pretend it wasn’t just because Stranger was provoked.
Oh, I agree completely.