rule on evil people's deaths?

About This Message Board
41

Well not perhaps the OMLY thing…

But still…give it a fucking gawd damn break.

An old guy that that died at a ripe ole age of fracking 88 died.

A famous guy that got elected multiple times by perhaps what what maybe the most famous/most populous//most edumuacted city on this planet.

And I say this as perhaps one of the most southern, redneck, pieces of shit posters on this board. I hate yankees/snowbirds. I think the civil war was a crock of shit. No doubt you can find posts of mine that paint me as racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, conservative, enviromental hating, blahhh blahhh piece of shit around these here parts.

And do I think upon occasion the modding around here sucks donkey balls.

But you know what?

You were a thread shitting dick in that thread.

Yeah, I said that. A THREAD SHITTING DICK.

Hell…throw the word CUNT in there for good measure.

Folks you don’t agree with a 100 percent are not fucking evil incarnate.

About half of the worlds folks are not happy about abortions. The other half not so much. Does that make by definition either way you look at it about half the world EVIL?

No, it does fucking not.

Get a fracking clue.

When somebody DIES. Read that carefully. GAWD DAMN FUCKING DIES. And somebody starts an at least semi respectable RIP thread about it…quite fucking pulling on your internet dick for a moment and THINK about what you are posting for a gawd fucking second.

And I say this as perhaps one of the most conservative/free speech live beyotch! posters around these here part.

Fuck, I agree with most all of Starving Artists posts for Petes sake!

Grow the fuck up, get a pair, get a brain, and get fucking clue as when and or how to post something in a RIP thread about someone you might not like.

Fuck You.

I figure I am getting a warning so I might as well make it worth my while.

a

42

You were right about the warning. Give me a break.

43

The Koch thread was titled “Ed Koch, RIP”. That is an acronym for “Rest In Peace”, not “Rip Into Pieces”, so one should assume that the tone of the thread is respectful. You could simmer your enmity in a little less vitriol – like, be tactfully snide.

By comparison, the Falwell thread was titled “Jerry Falwell is Dead”, which offers no indication of respectfulness, and even its OP suggests that a reader might expect negative comments. That is the salient difference between the two threads.

44

Okay. I assume I got an official warning. Fair enough (hell, I reported myself).

Not gonna complain about that.

However… I ALSO thought one would receive an official email regarding such a transgression. Heck, IIRC I was one of the first folks pushing for an email notice because hey, you might get pissed…say something moddable…and not come back to thread because you were too uber pissed to come back and notice the warning.

Is that notification system not in place or not working ?

Obviously IN THIS CASE it is not big deal because I knew it was coming. But in general it seems something aint quite right (though it could be my computer stupidity).

45

You think it was because Falwell was a conservative? Or because he:

-was a homophobe who blamed 9-11 on gays, said AIDS was God’s punishment for being a homosexual AND for those who support gay rights. He once said the freaking Teletubbies were a recruitment organization for gays!
-spoke against the sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa, and called Desmond Tutu a phony
-once accused Bill Clinton of murder
-initially was against desegregation

Hmmm…naaah, couldn’t be. :rolleyes:

46

You should have received a PM notifying you of the warning, and a subsequent e-mail notice telling you that you received a PM. You should also be able to see it under “infractions” in your profile. (No other posters can see this, only mods.)

47

OK, let’s look at it another way. What I want is a way to accurately predict which posts will draw mod sanction, and which will not. In the case of the “gun grabber” incident, as well as in this incident, how was the poster supposed to know, prior to posting, that the comment would be moderated? I am not aware of any precedent that would support either action. You talk of mods exercising judgment…but can’t you see how it can be frustrating when that judgment happens to be exercised in a way that could not have been predicted based on prior practice?

“Negative comments are allowed”–but apparently not too negative. Depending on which mod happens to respond. And what they had for breakfast that morning. And what phase of the moon applies.

At a minimum, in a situation like this, the warning should be reduced to a note, because the interpretation applied is not one that could be reasonably anticipated.

48

Okay…got the PM thingy (though I might note you have to LOOK for such a thing and given I have got all of whopping 2 of them in all my years here that notification process is rather questionable).

OTOH I have gotten no emails.

Damn you guys. I gotta warning and want proof damnit :slight_smile:

Again, my puter tardedness might have something to do with it.

49

Like Colibri says, you get a private message. And I did confirm that I sent one of those. You would only receive an email if you have notifications turned on - that is, if you usually get emails when someone sends you a private message. You can turn that on in your User CP.

50

prr, you’re original complaint was perfectly fine. Hell, I think all your follow-up posts have been reasonable in their defense of your position. It’s others that do this “gotcha” type business when they think their side has been maligned. It’s hilarious to watch initially because it totally undermines their argument and makes them look like a partisan hack. But after a while, it just makes you want to be able to slip the mods a gag or something so that the adults can finish having their discussion. And like I said, I only read ATMB in the first place to keep up with any potential rules changing. All this bullshit makes it more boring to do then it already is. It really is a shame that moderators can’t be pitted anymore so their inanity could land in the pit where it could be better handled for the waste of time that it is.

51

Oh, and for those who might believe I’m being overly sensitive in finding Idle Thoughts inherently hostile to my posts and looking for any excuse to add warnings to my copious files, let me display this post from a few years back, before **Idle Thoughts **was granted a modship, expressing the belief that I don’t belong on the SD at all, that I’m a sock puppet (for a past incident that later in the same thread is shown to be both false and malicious), that Idle Thoughts subscribes to to the more-than-somewhat paranoid belief that there are no coincidences, and that I’m therefore guilty of the things Idle Thoughts falsely believes me to be guilty of, and that Idle Thoughts is my sworn lifelong foe. Why they would allow someone like this to serve as a Mod escapes me, but why they would further support a Mod with an openly displayed (and false) belief that a poster is a sock puppet (unacknowledged in that thread, btw, as a falsehood) issue warnings to that poster is tantamount to a crime. IMO, of course.

52

Sometimes I think you like feeling persecuted.

53

You can honestly read that post and come away thinking that **Idle Thoughts **hasn’t been thinking of me as a sock (with zero proof, but much passion) for years? If that is what you think, and if you’re being honest in your response, then I have very little respect for your judgment.

54

Because we didn’t take Idle Thoughts’ opinion of you into account when we made him a mod. We also didn’t look to see if he likes Guinastasia or any other poster. It would be pretty hard to select new moderators if anyone who has said negative things about another poster is ineligible. We don’t have to like everybody. We’re supposed to apply the rules fairly. You can argue you didn’t break the rule about being a jerk in MPSIMS, but claiming this was based on personal bias (because he said something bad about you 3 1/2 years before he became a mod) is kind of absurd. And that poster was a sock, so he wasn’t entirely off base.

55

He wasn’t entirely off-base in accusing me for certain of being that sock? Nice to know you consider as Mods people who toss off unjustified accusations. Is that what you’re looking for?

Note that 2009 is considered recent when you’re searching to rationalize something you did in 2009, and positively ancient when I bring it up as having some relevance to the current situation. Good show!

56

I can assure you that my warning didn’t come from any personal thoughts and feelings that I may have about you. I would have warned anyone in that situation who made the same remark you did because–I’ll say it again–it went over the “do not be a jerk” rule.

However I will add here that I no longer think what I did back then, so your reasoning doesn’t work there either.

57

Is that an apology for a false accusation? If so, it’s very weak. If not, why not?

58

No, it is not an apology.

Because I don’t owe you an apology, and neither do the mods in general. Idle Thoughts could apologize to you if he were so inclined, but as a poster he was (and is) entitled to his opinion of you. This is a personal matter between the two of you and it’s not related to the warning you received last week, so it’s time you let it go.

59

I wasn’t addressing you, Marley. I was asking Idle Thoughts if he would care to apologize for falsely accusing me of using that specific sock. I didn’t (and don’t) expect him to apologize for accusing me of using that sock, though most decent people would be glad to apologize for making a false accusation, given the opportunity, and I do find it odd that he he has apparently changed his mind about my character. What acts, or posts, of mine have forced him to exchange his strongly-worded (mis)characterization of me in the past three years? I don’t believe there is one, so I’m pretty sure his claim to have re-thought his nasty thoughts is flimsy and facile. I don’t buy it, absent some compelling reason. If he wants to supply one or two, I’d be willing to listen.

Marley, I don’t need to hear from you–you are superfluous to this discussion, and your insinuation of yourself into this discussion is gratuitous and provocative. I refuse to be provoked into making some remarks about you that will get me banned, try as you might. Have a nice day–in fact, have two. They’re small.

I do find it extremely relevant to the warning I received last week, for the reasons already stated: it is a judgment call whether the remarks in a RIP thread are a little over the top or a lot over the top, and whether the figure being RIPed is evil enough to turn it into a free for all, anything goes sort of thread. The fact that Idle Thoughts had openly declared his view of me as big time jerk (until some mysterious point in the past three years that he hasn’t identified when he changed his mind) implies strongly that he wasn’t looking at the post itself as much as who made it.

60

My mistake. I didn’t scroll up far enough.

I’m not posting here because I think you need to hear from me.