While I concede that, yes, I had previously brought up the OKC bomber comment by Ditka a few times in the past, in what I’ve already conceded to be in a jerkish manner for this board, i don’t feel like i was out of line THIS time. While technically, yes, it was off topic to the thread topic, I portend that the thread is 600+ posts long and has long ago drifted from the OP. And my post was a direct, apt response, and gentle reminder, to ravenman’s questioning of said poster’s judgment of what is reasonable. The fact that I didn’t even finish my sentence should highlight that I was purposely treading lightly and not trying to hijack.
I’ll accept the warning if the tribunal deems it appropriate. But I just want my response on record.
“Well sir, I’ll admit that I held a loaded weapon to that man’s head and pulled the trigger and that he died instantly. But I say sir, that I did not intend to kill him! I am NOT GUILTY of Murder!”
Dude, you got told that if you did it again, you’d get warned. You did it again.
Without the context, I would have thought that it was another Nazi reference. Since that was also verboten in the thread, it doesn’t help you much. Sorry dude.
As a slight tangent, while we’re all here, I’ll just mention that the “argument” conducted in that thread by HurricaneDitka and DrDeth seems to be nothing more than attempts to goad other board members into paroxysms of rage. So far, they seem to be doing exceedingly well at it. Is it the opinion of the moderation staff that those members are arguing in good faith?
Without knowing what the thread was about or understanding the context of the joke, the moderation seems right. You got a note stating that if you did it again you’d get a warning, then you did it again and got a warning. It doesn’t seem all that questionable.
However, this is why I’ve always argued against mod notes, I’ve felt were on fair. In the past, when I’ve done that, several people will tell me it’s just a note, not a warning, so I should let it go. I’ll argue that if the note was given IMO incorrectly, it needs to be retracted for just this reason. If you didn’t feel it was fair, there’s a good chance you’ll end up doing it again. Then you’ll find yourself trying to argue the unfairness of a warning instead of a note.
That’s true, but keep in mind that with posters like them, all you have to do is show faux civility and you’re good to go as well. If you don’t take the bait, there won’t be any issues.
“Why, no, good sir, I daresay I cannot recall having been intimately acquainted with my own mother in that fashion. On to another topic, might I be so bold as to suggest a yogic maneuver befitting your advanced level of elasticity?”
In football, sometimes you see the defense get called for calling out signals to confuse the offense or make them jump early. Similarly, I think some posters should get warnings for being deliberately antagonizing and goading other posters into losing their tempers and violating a board rule. Personally, I think an ungoaded attack is worth a warning, but a little potshot in response to deliberately obtuse and irritating posting should just get a mod note.
I don’t understand the complaint. You directly and admittedly attacked the poster and not the post and you did so repeatedly. If there was ever a more clear cut violation of a rule, I have not seen it.
Ah, an interesting variation of the ol’ Shaft defense.
“He’s one baaaaaad mutha—“
“Shut your mouth!”
“I’m just talking about Timothy McVeigh!”
“Then we can dig it!”
I don’t think it works that way, unless you are talking about John Shaft. I think you’re stuck with the warning.
You engaged in behavior that you were specifically directed not to do. When the original note was communicated, it was made clear you would receive a warning if you did it again. You did it again, therefore the warning. There’s no wiggle room here.