My understanding is that some high post count posters feel that there’s too much jokiness in GQ and have unoffically boycotted it and the rule was an attempt to correct for this and return the forum to a previous unsullied state. I don’t think it’s been working.
I joined in 2001, I can safely say GQ was never in an “unsullied” state. I don’t go there as often as I should because sometimes it feels like the same questions over and over, and if it’s not, somebody has already answered before I get there. But gutting the humor out of it is going to gut out what most people came to this board to begin with. My very first post was in GQ and I stayed here because I got answers and jokes.
I’m not arguing with you, by the way, I’m just reiterating that I think the rule is kinda stupid. And doing it from the position of a longtime poster that posts a lot.
< sad voice >
SOME people get their official Warnings turned into mod notes when it’s a first offense.
The popular ones.
< /sad voice >
Hey! I’d do it for you, too, Fenny. 
Dooooooooooo eeeeeeettt!
:: twiddles fingers in Samclem’s face (a necessary Jedi mind-trick component) ::
This IS the warning you want to rescind.*
*or, failing that, you waaaaaant to kill Marley and take his coveted Admin job…and rescind the warning.
Right, considering that it’s completely subjective as to whether a “reasonable answer” has been provided or not. Hell, arguably (and it has been argued) that thread already had a 'reasonable answer" in which case Sam was in the wrong.
Asinine rule.
three points I’ll make, since I read the whole thread and now feel entitled. 
-
I don’t understand the anger/hatred toward Soviet/Russia jokes. Not that they are knee slapping funny, but I just don’t get the anger.
-
The rule about not making jokes in GQ (especially when the OP hasn’t been answered) is the right way to go, IMHO. When I first came to this board, I mostly hung out in GQ, and there were certain posters who added NO value to a GQ OP, but always had to pop in to give a drive-by joke. That used to piss me off, and I stopped going into GQ. When those posters were eventually banned or disappeared, GQ turned into a good forum again.
-
I believe the right decision was made to make this a mod note and not a warning. But samclem was also correct in stating that Hail Ants wasn’t in any real trouble. I’m glad it worked out for everyone. <sniff> It warms my cockles when we all get along. <sniff>
Thanks for reconsidering… my respect for you has been considerably restored.
Amazing what a difference a good night’s sleep can make, isn’t it? 
Fenris still has a very capricious and undeserved warning though. Again, not that it means anything, other than sullying an otherwise perfect record and ruining his chances to be valedictorian and get into any of the best schools, but still …
Occasionally, I will skim page 2 of GQ to find unanswered questions. If there are jokes in the first 5 or 6 answers, the page stats will mislead me. So the rule has some point. With that framework in mind, bumping a thread (once) and attaching a joke to it seems permissible.
Combining humor and information is in the best tradition of the column. As for humor-only posts I personally don’t mind them as long as they are funny, as opposed to tedious. Humor is hard to do well.
Now that you have reassessed, samclem, this may be a bit late, but I’ll throw it in for what it’s worth.
I saw two issues with the original ruling, neither of which was the Warning itself.
-
The Warning was vague. It may have been crystal clear in your mind what rule was violated, but “this” by itself is never a sufficient description of what rule was violated. We are left to guess what you meant. Was it making a joke post as the third post? Was it the Yakov Smirnov joke? Was it posting it giant red font?
-
The tone of the Warning was incredibly over the top. “Don’t EVER do this again.” Yikes! Sounds like the next Yakov joke is going to earn a ban. Which may be fine with some folks, but then I think we should probably make it a sticky or something so everyone can see it. I mean, it’s not like Hail Ants shot your dog or called someone a fuckface. You yourself admit that this has only a limited impact to Hail Ants’ record, and dropping it to a mod note further supports that. So why the “Don’t EVER do this again”? None of your posts in this thread acknowledge that tone in the original warning.
Again, I wasn’t bothered with the warning itself being a warning, but those two issues deserve some careful consideration.