# Rules of The BBQ Pit **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 12, 2000, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340 "2000-05-12T15:23:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2000, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340/21 "2000-05-15T11:48:35Z")
My 2 cents: I’m sure this has been thought out by minds wiser than my own, but when the moderators/administrators start editing content, you give an illusion that you have “control” of the board. And sometimes, in this litigous society, it’s better to say “We don’t censor ANYTHING.” or “We only edit out the ‘f’ word.” than to censor based on something subjective like tone. It’s like owning a parking lot. If you take their keys, you automatically assume more liability than if you don’t. It’s my opinion that you shouldn’t edit anything here, but rather put up signs that say, “Post at your own risk, you thin-skinned, lily livered bastards.” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2000, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340/22 "2000-05-15T13:53:35Z")
**Rousseau** pontificated: > [@](#): > > Then again, I don’t have a lifetime SDMB average of better than 10 posts per day. If I did, I suppose I might get a little up in arms about such a thing. And then I’d realize how stupid I was being, and take a vacation back to the real world for a little while. Since I don’t quite understand your obsession with me and how many posts I’ve made to date, I’d tell you to go fuck yourself, but the pole stuck up your ass would prevent it. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2000, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340/23 "2000-05-15T14:41:51Z")
**weirddave** wrote: > [@](#): > > I have never seen this kind of personal favoritism from the mods here. For the record, I agree with you here. **Thought** wrote: > [@](#): > > I’m know they [our moderators] take the job seriously and they seem to do a great job. MOST of the time. I see from time to time, things I would handle a bit differently. I also agree with you here, **Thought**. **Yue Han** , my apologies for posting my thoughts in all the threads that addressed this issue. The fact that so many threads cropped up is what prompted me to ask for a clarification here. If it helps you any, think of this thread as out of context of those previous, and then re-read the OT. As **TVeblen** said, I realize this place doesn’t owe me squat, but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to continue to participate. **Fanny May** asked: I came to read the “Rules of The BBQ Pit”, but I see they aren’t here. Are they somewhere? Or don’t I really want to know? [/quote] You know what? You’re right. The Rules of the Pit were posted in the [“New rules for the BBQ Pit”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=9484) thread. In it, this was posted: > [@](#): > > 1. … We will once in a while decide that a poster or group of posters has gone too far. Unprovoked, go-for-the-balls personal abuse, for example, makes us twitchy… > > 2. You’ll appreciate that it’s impossible to enforce this policy uniformly. Different people help moderate the Pit at different times and some of us are more tolerant than others… > > 3. The preceding are guidelines only… > > 4. Don’t get paranoid about this. We won’t warn or ban people simply for disagreeing with other posters or with us in strong terms. Routine flame wars, name-calling, creative vulgarity, etc., generally won’t get us ticked off–and if they do you’ll hear about it first. We just don’t want our users to feel, after reading the Pit, like they have to take a bath. In that very same thread way back on 3/27/00 I questioned this, as the vagueness of it made me “twitchy.” The great Ed Zotti’s response? > [@](#): > > Read and learn, bubba. There are lots of threads in the Pit. Most of them do not have warnings in them. While not an infallible guide, this may reasonably be taken as an indication that we did not find the contents objectionable. Another good rule of thumb is to ask oneself: if I were to say this to someone in person, would it likely result in my getting the shit kicked out of me? This should keep you out of most jams. Well, I’ve read, and I suppose I’ve learned. Still don’t like it, and it still makes me nervous. (And I know nobody cares if what I think, so please don’t flame me for stating my own opinion.) Just a couple more things, and then I think we can put an end to this, at least as far as I’m concerned. **evilbeth** , thank you for summing up things for me. How come they listen to you and not me? ☹ (Kidding!) > [@](#): > > … Esprix questioned the edit as to whether it was offensive to the “victim” (in his mind, I assume, acceptable) or whether it was arbitrary just because a mod thought it was bad (in his mind, questionable, to say the least) That’s right - I questioned the edit. That’s it. Nothing more. I didn’t demand **Tuba** ’s removal. I didn’t threaten to leave. I didn’t start a petition. I didn’t threaten legal action. I simply questioned her judgement in this one instance when the subject was brought up. That’s it. And because the answer was “it was a cheap shot and crossed the line,” that seemed too amorphous and I wasn’t sure how that fit in with the Rules of the Pit, which is self-described as the place to flame. So I asked for a clarification. That’s all. No incitement to riot. No name-calling. Just asked for a rules check. Nothing more. It was everyone else that seemed to pick up my ball and run with it. **manhattan** wrote: > [@](#): > > I thought I replied to the OP. I still think I replied to the OP, because here’s the thing: there was an edit but no censure, no warning, no banning, no threaten to ban, nothing beyond the edit. So there is not a need to re-recite any rules. I’m not quite sure why you’re obsessing over this “no one got banned” thing, as it had nothing to do with the OP, which was simply asking for a clarification of the rules (which, at this point, I’ve gotten). Was it that I ended it by saying I didn’t want to get censured or banned? By saying that I didn’t mean to imply that anyone had been or would be because of this incident. Sorry for the confusion, if that’s what prompted your vehemence on the issue - my intention was just not wanting to break the rules, that’s all, and if the rules aren’t clear, then I don’t know when I’m breaking them. > [@](#): > > Now this naturally brings up the question of “Why did I come down so hard on Esprix?” First of all, I’ll fess up that I was annoyed to hear about it in at least four different threads. More importantly, to tell the truth, it was because I like him. Normally he does not play the role of whiny petulant child. It was my hope that my little slap upside his head would return some sense to him and send him back to the business of asking, answering, debating and sharing that we have in mind as the goals of this message board. I still hold out high hopes that this will be the result. Fine, sue me - I had a bad day. Between this thread and being jumped on for stating obvious truths to a certain soon-to-be-wed couple, I was feeling a bit beleagured last week. The relaxing weekend helped me chill out a bit. (Real life has been stressful as well, so reading this didn’t help matters - my problem, not yours, though.) However, jumping down my throat not only didn’t answer my question, but it pissed me off and made me look at you a little differently. Bottom line: After having re-read the rules, and after reading this thread and hearing from **Tuba** elsewhere, I suppose it all answers my question, so I humbly withdraw the OT as it has been answered, whether I like it or not. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![hawthorne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@hawthorne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hawthorne)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2000, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340/24 "2000-05-15T16:33:02Z")
Your post **Esprix** linked to the rules the newbie requested, but that none of us had been arsed to supply. The rest indicated that you’d taken a breath and are prepared to get on, even if the past few days have not been ideal. Good. Hosed down [Gay Guy II](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=24008). Twas a touch long though 😉 picmr ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2000, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340/25 "2000-05-15T16:38:43Z")
define “truths”…nah forget it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-of-the-bbq-pit/19340.md?page=1)