I made an innocuous and FAIR observation in the Boxing thread. Rick felt the need to admonish me, not bothering to note the OP’s lack of issue with the post. WTF gives!
Link?
I assume this is the thread
edit: yep, this is the modding
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16876300&postcount=39
Yup. Sorry for no link.
Innocuous, fair, and thread-shitting. Trifecta!
The OP admitted he worded the OP in such a way that my post was inevitable. He didn,'t seen to have a problem with it. So I assume nonmods have no right to judge the intent of posts?
Everybody has the right to judge the intent of posts. That’s what the Report Post button is for. Whether or not the mods take action on that judgment is their, well, judgment.
Actually looks like he waited two weeks to moderate it, and then you waited almost another week to complain.
That noted, bad call on the modding. The notion that a lack of well known fighters may contribute to the eventual demise of the sport is on topic and fair game in a thread about the current state of the sport. Not a hijack, not a derailment.
I agree with Oaks. Bad call. This the first line of the OP:
“Though some claim that boxing is dead or dying…”
etv’s comment was the first reply. The OP came in and addressed the issue, asked that these kinds of comments not be made and admitted it was his (the OP’s) mistake to open with it.
etv dropped it after that.
All that said, it was just a note - not a warning. Still a bit heavy handed.
The OP isn’t a mod, so what he or she thinks is not really relevant. And so what if the mod action was a week or two later. Maybe that’s when it was reported or noticed.
And it looks like threadshitting to me, especially since it was the first response to the thread.
Ironically I was returning to thread to note how wrong I was. 
To be honest, my reply to the boxing thread would have been the same as etv78’s. I personally don’t think that was thread-shitting at all.
I think the OP initiated the response. If he didn’t mention anything at all about the sport dying, but instead just stated that he wanted to talk about boxing and to leave out MMA discussions, I wouldn’t have written a response like etv78. Maybe etv78 can speak to that. However, as the OP is currently worded, as. I said, if i made a post it would have been very close to etv78’s, and i wouldn’t have meant it to be thread-shitting.
However, since there was no warning issued, I don’t think it’s worth the time to debate it.
As many people (including myself) have observed, the line between being given a “warning” and having a moderator officially tell you “do not do this again” is a negligible one.
IYO.
Agreed.
Nope. One goes on your “permanent record” and one does not. I would not call that difference “negligible”.
Only for values of “negligible” that mean “gigantic”.
Nemo can speak for himself, but I thought he was saying the line that you had to cross in order to make an action rise to the level of warning, rather than admonishment, was negligible, not that the consequences were negligible. A poster can’t really tell whether his act will lead to an admonishment or a warning.
Which might be true for more serious sins than the one discussed here. But for something like this, I don’t think there’s any chance at all it’d receive a warning, and definitely not a warning that stuck.
Really? I just read it so it appears a permanent record has been created.
Or are you’re saying that if the OP chose to do the same thing next week, Rick Jay’s post would have no meaning? It’s “forgotten” as soon as it’s written and has no effect on future events? If that’s the case, why bother posting it in the first place?
Perhaps one of you can explain what the differences are.