# Rule for Mods/Admins suggestion **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 27, 2006, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455 "2006-04-27T15:13:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/81 "2006-04-29T16:28:06Z")
FWIW, Garfield226, I didn’t see the comment to catsix as a threat to ban or suspend. If Tuba had actually intended to ban or suspend catsix she would have run the idea past us mods. Something like, “Catsix is really being a jerk. She was warned before here, here and here. I think we should suspend. Any objections?” I just looked through my emails and the prospect of catsix being banned, suspended or even officially warned for that was never even mentioned. I read the “I’ll try to overlook it” as “I’ll try to ignore your tone and so not be as nasty in return”, not a threat of official retribution. Even an admin won’t ban any member besides a really obvious troll, spammer, or sock without getting an OK from another one of us and no serious objections from the rest of the mods. That’s why it can sometimes take a while til someone gets banned after the “final straw”. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/82 "2006-04-29T16:41:55Z")
> [@Gaudere](#): > > FWIW, Garfield226, I didn’t see the comment to catsix as a threat to ban or suspend. If Tuba had actually intended to ban or suspend catsix she would have run the idea past us mods. Something like, “Catsix is really being a jerk. She was warned before here, here and here. I think we should suspend. Any objections?” I just looked through my emails and the prospect of catsix being banned, suspended or even officially warned for that was never even mentioned. > > I read the “I’ll try to overlook it” as “I’ll try to ignore your tone and so not be as nasty in return”, not a threat of official retribution. Even an admin won’t ban any member besides a really obvious troll, spammer, or sock without getting an OK from another one of us and no serious objections from the rest of the mods. That’s why it can sometimes take a while til someone gets banned after the “final straw”. I appreciate your addressing my post. I disagree with your conclusion though. I don’t necessarily think she meant it as a _serious_ threat to ban **catsix** , more of a “ooh, look out, if you’re not careful I’m going to BAN you, yes I am!” It was, as I and others have read it, an empty threat but since it was coming from someone acting from a position of authority, a threat nonetheless. This is exactly what she said “doesn’t happen” in this very thread, and exactly what this thread was created to clarify. Regarding her not discussing it with other admins: If Tuba herself knew it was empty when she made it, there would have been no reason to take the next step and discuss it with the other admins. I think she knew if she really banned **catsix** for that exchange, no one would have supported it. I think she knew **catsix** hadn’t broken any rules, but she still wanted **catsix** off her back. I think she decided that the best way to do that was throw her administrative weight around. I think she knew she didn’t have license to do that, exactly, and so she couched it in semi-vague terms. She had (and continues to have) ample opportunity to make her true intentions known. Speaks volumes. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/83 "2006-04-29T16:46:35Z")
And I forgot to mention that **catsix** (you know, the person to whom Tuba was trying to convey whatever it is she was trying to convey) certainly received a threatening message (bolding mine): > [@catsix](#): > > I think I was accused of being a liar in a manner that assumes I wanted to stir up shit. I think TubaDiva was accusing me of lying and making up fictions just to get a reaction out of her. I think I’d still like to know what it is she wants to promise me, because I doubt that it’s tea and cookies. > > **I think that regular posters have been given official warnings for things just as subtle** , and that one of them has recently been suspended for the “Fuck off and die” colloquialism that nobody I’ve ever met takes as an actual wish of a real death. **I think that the promises TubaDiva wants to make me are either banning or physical harm** , I think that she was very angry (and very wrong because I wasn’t lying, which other people proved pretty damn quick) when she made that post, and that **if the title underneath her username had said Member instead of Admin, she would’ve at least got a warning, or possibly even banned for what was said right there**. I think it would’ve been cited in a thread in ATMB with the ‘promises’ as ‘wishing death and/or physical harm on another poster’ and the false accusations of deliberate lies being painted as ‘calling other posters troll is not allowed here.’ > > I’ve been fairly quiet about this whole thing since it happened, mostly because I really don’t want to be the center of attention, and **I think that regardless of whether an apology is ever made, although TubaDiva is the one who did something wrong, I’m the one who will face the consequences. I have no doubt in my mind that she’s going to remember this, and if I so much as get close to the line or make a typing mistake on someone’s name when quoting them, I’m history.** Sounds spot-on, and if an administrator had had the same exchange with me (who has caused few if any problems in my nearly-seven years here), I would feel similarly. ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/84 "2006-04-29T16:59:19Z")
Well, if she knew banning catsix would cause a shitstorm and so refrained because of that, surely she would know that _threatening_ to ban would result in an equal shitstorm and she would avoid doing that too? I don’t see how you can argue that she knows enough to not discuss banning because of consequences yet say she would threaten to do exactly that. I mean, if I knew I couldn’t ban you becuase I’d get in trouble, I wouldn’t say “I’m going to ban you!” because that would cause equal trouble. I really think she wasn’t threatening catsix, and I consider the total lack of discussion on banning her then to be good evidence of this. I _totally_ do not get any threat of physical harm from what Tuba said; I think catsix is going a bit overboard there. Tuba’s out now, so she can’t respond anyway. My feeling is she’s not posting in this thread since she’s afraid she’ll say something that comes across as angry or condescending and make it worse. If she said she didn’t mean it as a threat, would you believe her? 'Cause if not there’s really no point. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/85 "2006-04-29T17:12:09Z")
> [@Gaudere](#): > > Well, if she knew banning catsix would cause a shitstorm and so refrained because of that, surely she would know that _threatening_ to ban would result in an equal shitstorm and she would avoid doing that too? I don’t see how you can argue that she knows enough to not discuss banning because of consequences yet say she would threaten to do exactly that. I mean, if I knew I couldn’t ban you becuase I’d get in trouble, I wouldn’t say “I’m going to ban you!” because that would cause equal trouble. My guess is she thought she was crafty enough by putting it in vague language. Who knows? We all know she’s done really stupid things without thinking before, and this wouldn’t even be the worst. > [@](#): > > I really think she wasn’t threatening catsix, and I consider the total lack of discussion on banning her then to be good evidence of this. I _totally_ do not get any threat of physical harm from what Tuba said; I think catsix is going a bit overboard there. Then let’s hear your answer: “There is much I’d like to promise you for your dishonest words and overall nasty ways.” What is it that **TubaDiva** wanted to “promise” **catsix** , if not a physical threat or threat of punishment? > [@](#): > > Tuba’s out now, so she can’t respond anyway. My feeling is she’s not posting in this thread since she’s afraid she’ll say something that comes across as angry or condescending and make it worse. If she said she didn’t mean it as a threat, would you believe her? 'Cause if not there’s really no point. I can accept that I haven’t thought through all the alternatives for what Tuba meant. She’s the one who said it, and she’s the only one who knows what she meant. Whether I would believe it or not would depend on her answer. I asked a specific question and “I’m sorry you took it as a threat,” (which is what I have a feeling we’re going to get, if anything) wouldn’t answer it. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/86 "2006-04-29T18:42:35Z")
> [@](#): > > **Gaudere** said: > I really think she wasn’t threatening catsix, and I consider the total lack of discussion on banning her then to be good evidence of this. I _totally_ do not get any threat of physical harm from what Tuba said; I think catsix is going a bit overboard there. She said there were things she’d like to promise me. What are those things? What promises does **TubaDiva** want to make me? > [@](#): > > **Garfield226** said: > Then let’s hear your answer: “There is much I’d like to promise you for your dishonest words and overall nasty ways.” What is it that TubaDiva wanted to “promise” catsix, if not a physical threat or threat of punishment? That’s what I’d like to know. What, exactly, does she want to promise me? I have no doubt in my mind that if I, or any other regular member, had used **that exact same sentence** to someone else, we’d be banned for making threats against another poster. I only have one question left. What exactly, specifically is the ‘much’ that she’d like to promise me? (I apologize for any typos. I have cut my finger and it is hard to type with the bandage on.) ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/87 "2006-04-29T18:50:50Z")
> [@C K Dexter Haven](#): > > First, there’s this wonderful new invention called email, that allows you to ask for clarification privately without involving the entire world. As a mod, would you respond well to an email along the lines of “I don’t like what you did/said, were you acting as a poster or a mod, i’d like to insult you for it?” Are you suggesting that an email after every potential problem along these lines is an efficient way to go about things? > [@](#): > > Second, are you telling me that whenever you feel yourself insulted, you always reply in kind? You are unable to respond in a calm, well-mannered, polite tone? Any time someone says something that you interpret as offensive, you yell back? You always call them on it? That road rage is your normal behavior pattern? No, i’m not. A lot of the time i’m able to control myself (or at least step away from the computer until i’m less annoyed). On the other hand, sometimes I feel a good insulting is the only way to get through to someone; reasonable language and moderate words often fall on deaf ears. > [@](#): > > Or are you saying that you don’t **know** whether you’re insulting someone? I don’t believe that: you’re bright enough to know when/whether you’re being insulting. I usually know when i’m being insulting - although being a teenager means my social skills aren’t as developed as they could be 😉 . No, i’m saying I could be confused as to the nature of what it is i’m insulting - what I think is the actions of a mod wearing their poster hat (and so fair game) could actually be mod hatted actions. That’s why I was wondering whether “I thought he/she was acting as a poster!” is a legitimate defense or not. > [@](#): > > I have to say that I think this thread has gone on way, way past any usefulness and has degenerated into the absurd. Sorry. I was considering (as the OP) asking for this one to be closed, and starting a new one with a plea to stick to the issue, but i’m not confident that would happen. > [@](#): > > I understand that’s a useful distinction, but I personally that I think it’s pretty much silly. I like **Giraffe** ’s analogy to a party. The host(s) serve two roles: they are there at the party, and they are the people giving/serving at the party. Do you treat them differently when they’re opening more champagne than you do when they’re standing around chatting? Do they treat you differently? No, I don’t, and they don’t. But I think it’s silly to act as if there is no distinction at all. The mod-hat/poster-hat difference is already enshrined in the rules; we members already are forced to treat mods differently depending on what hat they’re wearing. One of those rules is that we can’t insult mod actions, but can insult mods-as-posters; do you dispute this? I’m just trying to make that difference as clear as possible, so that unpleasantness in the future is avoided. At the moment, if there’s a confusion over what hat a mod is wearing, we members are expected to back down; to not insult, lest we mistakenly break a rule. > [@](#): > > This is why we’ve never wanted or allowed different usernames when we’re modding. We take responsibility for what we say; and yes, we are held to a higher standard than other posters. Do we always stick to that standard? No, we’re human beings, and sometimes we stress out. Sometimes there’s history, whether in emails or on the boards, behind the scenes that y’all up front don’t see. But you’re not held to a higher standard. You must comply with less rules than we do, and some of the rules which do apply to you are watered down. If you’re claiming that, when a mod breaks a rule, the punishment is likely to be more harsh than if a poster were to break that rule, that may be true - I don’t know how strict mod punishments are because, as you say, that all happens off-board. But therein lies the problem; we can’t see justice being done. In all the time i’ve posted (which isn’t long, I admit) and lurked (which is a good while longer), i’ve never seen a mod banned, suspended, warned, or punished in any kind of fashion, nor have I heard of anything like that happening. It likely has; as you say, you’re not perfect. But I haven’t heard about it. Can you blame me if it seems mods are held to a lower standard than members? ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/88 "2006-04-29T19:26:47Z")
> [@Gaudere](#): > > I really think she wasn’t threatening catsix, and I consider the total lack of discussion on banning her then to be good evidence of this. I _totally_ do not get any threat of physical harm from what Tuba said; I think catsix is going a bit overboard there. Absolutely. Far too much is being read into a few testy words. I’m all for jumping up and down on the mods (figuratively, of course!) when they stray from the primrose path, but this is a storm in a teacup. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/89 "2006-04-29T19:34:03Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Absolutely. > > Far too much is being read into a few testy words. I’m all for jumping up and down on the mods (figuratively, of course!) when they stray from the primrose path, but this is a storm in a teacup. Then answer the question. And for that matter, answer this one: Why didn’t **TubaDiva** answer the question? You and all the mods and admins have tiptoed around this for this entire thread. **catsix** would like an answer. I would like an answer. I won’t put words in other posters’ mouths, but based on their postings there are at least a few more who would like an answer as well. Posters in general here are held accountable for their words. Administrators shouldn’t be exempt. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/90 "2006-04-29T19:39:23Z")
I don’t know why anybody even bothers with these threads. Time after time paying customers have legitimate grievances with the moderation and customer service offered on these boards only to be met with lame excuses and the clique mentality of the moderators. It’s obvious that nothing is going to be done about this or any other customer complaint for that matter, whether it be the appalling speed of the servers, the featureless board software outcompeted by free boards all over the internet or the frankly digusting attitude of certain members of the administrative staff towards the customer base. **Frank** , you can list me as another poster who immediately recognised what **TubaDiva** was implying in her threat aimed at **catsix**. I find it difficult to believe that any right minded person could come to a different conclusion, to be honest. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/91 "2006-04-29T22:29:46Z")
> [@Dominic Mulligan](#): > > **Frank** , you can list me as another poster who immediately recognised what **TubaDiva** was implying in her threat aimed at **catsix**. I find it difficult to believe that any right minded person could come to a different conclusion, to be honest. Ah, the ‘all right-thinking people’ argument, Well, that certainly clinches it. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/92 "2006-04-29T22:35:06Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Ah, the ‘all right-thinking people’ argument, Well, that certainly clinches it. As, of course, the “ignoring a direct question” approach does. Really, when pointing out flaws, valid as they may be, it’s wise to try and avoid them yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/93 "2006-04-29T22:41:54Z")
> [@](#): > > My guess is she thought she was crafty enough by putting it in vague language. If she was vague enough that it wasn’t read as a threat then what good is it; whereas if it was clear enough to be read as a threat, we have the same "“if you say she’s smart enough not to talk about banning, then why do you then claim she’s stupid enough to say she’ll ban?” issue. > [@](#): > > Then let’s hear your answer: “There is much I’d like to promise you for your dishonest words and overall nasty ways.” What is it that TubaDiva wanted to “promise” catsix, if not a physical threat or threat of punishment? I really don’t know; I’m not Tuba. Maybe “I’ll promise you that your nasty ways will prevent your from ever having a satisfying personal relationship.” Or “I promise you that if you ever need a favor I am not going to do it.” Or “I promise you that after you were such a jerk, I wouldn’t piss in your ear if your brains were on fire.” Or maybe she just thought it sounded cool and echoed the “promised” bit from catsix she was quoting and what she would actually “promise” never even crossed her mind. However, even if Tuba comes back here and says she meant something else, I kind of think the people who think it meant she planned to ban or officially censure catsix won’t buy it; they seem pretty sure of their interpretation. So I’m not sure how much good all this is doing. I do know the thought of any physical retribution is so far outside of the realm of possibilty that I wouldn’t even consider it; and as for any board-based retribution, it looks unfounded too because if she had really planned anything it would have been run by us. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/94 "2006-04-29T23:01:34Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Ah, the ‘all right-thinking people’ argument, Well, that certainly clinches it. It wasn’t an argument, it was my opinion. I’m incredulous that anyone can even think that **TubaDiva** wasn’t hinting at the possibility of a ban. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2006, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/95 "2006-04-29T23:24:09Z")
> [@Gaudere](#): > > Maybe “I’ll promise you that your nasty ways will prevent your from ever having a satisfying personal relationship.” Or “I promise you that if you ever need a favor I am not going to do it.” Or “I promise you that after you were such a jerk, I wouldn’t piss in your ear if your brains were on fire.” But she’s allowed to say all those things. Why wouldn’t she just come out and say them, instead of suggesting she’s unable to? > [@](#): > > Or maybe she just thought it sounded cool and echoed the “promised” bit from catsix she was quoting and what she would actually “promise” never even crossed her mind. This to me sounds like a reasonable interpretation. > [@](#): > > However, even if Tuba comes back here and says she meant something else, I kind of think the people who think it meant she planned to ban or officially censure catsix won’t buy it; they seem pretty sure of their interpretation. So I’m not sure how much good all this is doing. You (and others) seem equally sure that **Tuba** did not mean those things; I think it’s funny how the “howling wolves” are derided for stubbournly clinging to the forlorn, pitiful hope that **Tuba** meant one thing, while the mods are piously sticking with their certain belief that **Tuba** is in the right. You’re two sides of the same coin. > [@](#): > > I do know the thought of any physical retribution is so far outside of the realm of possibilty that I wouldn’t even consider it;… Why, if I may ask? To me it is exactly the same chance as any kind of physical threat (which I’m not sure this was) made by a poster, and as such the chance that it is possible should be taken as seriously as any other poster’s words. > [@](#): > > …and as for any board-based retribution, it looks unfounded too because if she had really planned anything it would have been run by us. Ok, then i’d like to ask this; have you or the other mods discussed banning, suspending, warning, or punishing **catsix** at any point? And was **Tuba** involved in that discussion? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2006, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/96 "2006-04-30T00:56:02Z")
> [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > Ok, then i’d like to ask this; have you or the other mods discussed banning, suspending, warning, or punishing **catsix** at any point? And was **Tuba** involved in that discussion? There are no other punishments than warning, suspension, or banning. We do not discuss warnings, merely issue them as each of us deems appropriate. Bannings and suspensions are discussed, but: > [@Gaudere](#): > > I just looked through my emails and the prospect of catsix being banned, suspended or even officially warned for that was never even mentioned. I can’t find any either. I cannot speak for other mods; I have recused myself from (I believe) two such discussions due to my intense dislike of the posters involved. Other than brand-new guests who are spammers or obvious trolls, none of us (even **TubaDiva** ) may ban posters unilaterally. There _must_ be a consensus amongst us. > [@Dominic Mulligan](#): > > Frank, you can list me as another poster who immediately recognised what TubaDiva was implying in her threat aimed at catsix. I find it difficult to believe that any right minded person could come to a different conclusion, to be honest. Obviously, I am (as I said earlier) completely bewildered as to why anyone would come to your conclusion. Her comment was not at all out of line for the Pit, and no poster would have been warned for it. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2006, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/97 "2006-04-30T01:19:12Z")
Thanks for your response, **Frank**. I think if nothing else we can say it’s certain that if Tuba was making a threat, then it was a totally empty one. I’d still say if it was a threat, being empty doesn’t excuse it, though. > [@Frank](#): > > Obviously, I am (as I said earlier) completely bewildered as to why anyone would come to your conclusion. Her comment was not at all out of line for the Pit, and no poster would have been warned for it. Not out of line for the Pit; Depends. Am I allowed in the Pit to suggest that I’d like another poster to be banned? If so (and I think that’s the case, but not totally sure) then agreed. Not out of line for any poster; disagree. She’s a mod. There’s a great deal of difference between _me_ making a veiled or empty threat of banning and a mod - they’ve got the power to back it up, and is at the very least in a better position to convince the other mods than I am. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2006, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/98 "2006-04-30T01:23:11Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Well, you see what happens. Yep. At some point, you fuck up and issue a warning under the poster username or flame someone in the Pit under the mod one. You think you get abuse _now_… As for the **tuba/catsix** issue, whether or not **tuba** actually meant a veiled threat of banning is irrelevant. It was read that way by **catsix** and a large number of others (including myself, truth be told); as such, an apology is in order for, if nothing else, the very slightly menacing tone of the post, intentional or not. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2006, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455/99 "2006-04-30T13:07:06Z")
**Q.E.D.** : I’m confused. Are you suggesting a new rule, that any time someone reads your post incorrectly, **you** must apologize for their misunderstanding? Or would this only apply to moderators? Either way, I think this is yet another example of how this thread has degenerated into utter absurdity. On some past comments: > [@](#): > > As a mod, would you respond well to an email along the lines of “I don’t like what you did/said, were you acting as a poster or a mod, i’d like to insult you for it?” Are you suggesting that an email after every potential problem along these lines is an efficient way to go about things? Well, frankly, as a Mod, I am more likely to respond favorably to a private email, to explain what happened than I am to a Pit thread in which dozens of people who are not involved all leap in with glee for a public whipping. I tend to avoid those threads. > [@](#): > > But you’re not held to a higher standard. You must comply with less rules than we do, and some of the rules which do apply to you are watered down. Oh, please. That’s absurd and total bullshit. The only place we have slightly more freedom than posters is when we’re engaged in mod duties. We have to be able to make moderator decisions, like when someone is breaking rules, and we don’t wan’t members “playing junior mod,” and making accusations/statements that only a mod should make. This is necessary if we’re going to have a moderated board, and you are, again, being absurd. > [@](#): > > In all the time i’ve posted (which isn’t long, I admit) and lurked (which is a good while longer), i’ve never seen a mod banned, suspended, warned, or punished in any kind of fashion, nor have I heard of anything like that happening. That’s only because you haven’t been around long enough. But then, getting facts doesn’t stop y’all from holding dramatic and vengeful opinions, does it? **TubaDiva** said what she wanted to say. Neither she nor I see any purpose to reading through a thread in which people are insulting her vilely (both as poster and as mod) outside the Pit. I see no reason for this thread to continue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-for-mods-admins-suggestion/354455.md?page=4)