# Seven's Suspension **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 30, 2009, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738 "2009-07-30T01:50:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/81 "2009-07-30T19:34:23Z")
> [@SmartAleq](#): > > Since you brought it up, however, it would be interesting to compare **Seven’s** disciplinary record with that of some other posters Absolutely not going to happen. > [@](#): > > I would suggest a complete overhaul of the rules sticky, to include any and all warnable, suspendable and bannable offenses and the escalation schedule leading up to banning. While you’re not required to trust our judgment, speaking as one moderator I’ve got no interest in creating an “escalation schedule” and removing any level of common sense and discretion from the process. This is a volunteer position and not a job. If anything I think the list of warnable offenses has been overspecified, since we already have posters who hang around in the interest of making up new definitions for those offenses. > [@](#): > > In the sticky it would be appropriate to append a screenshot of the applicable user CP page showing infraction status so everyone knows how to check it. When a poster gets an infraction, he’s automatically sent a private message with a link and the details. This probably covers this particular issue. Not to mention the actual ‘mod warning’ posts we make. > [@](#): > > I expect doing so would make y’all look like stand up guys for figuring out a sensible, uniform disciplinary schedule, clear rules and a clean slate. […] Since clear rules do not invite debate I think the right word for this view might be “charming.” > [@](#): > > Being able to publish the ACTUAL disciplinary record in suspension/banning notices results in fewer protest threads. Seriously, **SmartAleq** , we are not cops and we are not a court. When we suspend or ban someone we usually post links to the warnings that lead to the action, if not all the warnings that person has accumulated. I believe that’s already transparent enough without adding more procedural hurdles. This is a text-based message board, so there’s already a record of every post unless a thread is removed, which is very rare. Also, are you dropping your claim about “suddenly mak[ing] up some links to posts that didn’t get warnings?” Or were you simply saying it’s easy to do so? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/82 "2009-07-30T19:35:25Z")
> [@SmartAleq](#): > > I wasn’t addressing **Seven** specifically, My mistake. Sorry. > [@](#): > > In the sticky it would be appropriate to append a screenshot of the applicable user CP page showing infraction status so everyone knows how to check it. **Skip** posted screenshots in the thread that I linked to in my last post. But this is a good suggestion. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/83 "2009-07-30T20:03:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Let’s be clear here: what number would be sufficient, and what would you consider a reversal? I’ve overturned two or three warnings and at least a couple of thread closings based on reasonable requests. That’s a fair enough question. The first response in the first link ShadowFacts linked, for example, is Rhythmdvl thanking Ed for something that was long asked for and suggested every time money came up as a reason for a lack of board upgrades: advertising on the SDMB. It was hinted at, suggested, recommended for a long time and batted away. Until it wasn’t. Same with the ridiculous insistence that people whose charter member status has lapsed through the unforgivable sin of missing a re-subscribe deadline\* not be allowed to pay for the title. Same with the suggestion that the boards actually get a server that works (seven years that one, minimum). What’s even more puzzling is the way posters fellate a board admin for fixing something he should have prevented from happening in the first place. Same with the constant push back against enabling any of the vBulletin options that exist. HORRORS! Someone will surely abuse them at some point, therefore the remainder of posters should never be able to access them. Besides, we’re intelligent adults here, and intelligent adults never actually let their hair down and have fun. Same with the absurd language restrictions in the Pit. What were you thinking? Something that I acknowledge is a controversial subject: Although I cannot find the link, it has been suggested that the administrators step down after a certain time period (I think it was 5 years) and/or be replaced. A closed system cannot correct itself. I do not believe that TubaDiva has any less than the board’s best interest at heart. However; I do believe that the direction the board has taken since pay to post has been a steady slide toward oligarchy. Suggestions have been poo-poohed for many different reasons, and I expect to be subjected to some of them ‘Yyou’ve only been posting here for xxx, what do you know?’ Because of course, length of subscription determines valid input. ‘We polled and nobody wants that.’ If no one wants it, why are there still threads asking for it? ‘You’re just being negative to get a reaction, and I’m not calling you a troll because I’m not allowed but you sure act like one’ Right. Being a somewhat objective third party willing to tackle subjects that someone too emotionally tied to a situation is willing to ignore = troll as I know it is easy to become emotionally invested, and people who have been around a while see any suggestions that comes from someone who has been around less time as an attack. In reality, many posters have expressed the sentiment that it’s too bad the Dope is not what it was, and they don’t know why the prevailing culture of no has taken over. Many of them have also posted that the reason they still come back is the hope that it will at some point go back to being what it once was even though they know it’s unlikely, and that people they genuinely like are here. But the hilarious threads and massive entertaining trainwrecks are becoming fewer and further between, and now it’s just circle jerks in great debates with the same people talking past each other and getting in cheap shots and a Pit that was eviscerated and reads like a RO patrol member’s wet dreams. Really. Is anyone in favor of a mother cutting out her kid’s brain and eating it? Does anyone expect Lekatt to suddenly become sensible about some stupid dream he had? Is Shodan ever going to drop his ironic whine fest about the whiners on the Left? This is not rocket science. Intelligent does not have to mean lack of fun or play. Sarcasm does not have to mean condescending and rude. Why is fun so horrible? And dammit, The Grapist was funny. \*I and others have put forth reasonable suggestions for solving that. It isn’t difficult and the reasoning for not doing it is exclusionary and petty. Not to mention bad customer service. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/84 "2009-07-30T20:03:18Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > No. I’m. Not. Or do you really think that two examples of administrators asking for suggestions and _one_ example of a poster initiated request = refutation for ten years of ignoring many other reasonable requests? I’m sorry, but you are in fact wrong. You stated that “Making a simple request then standing respectfully back and waiting for a response does not initiate change.” I have three examples that refute you definitively. If you want to change your statement to include “Most of the time…”, feel free, but as originally stated, you are wrong. All three links are to moderators/administrators making changes based on respectful requests. Yes, the first two examples do not include the initial request from the user(s), but they both are responses to requests for change from members. If you want me to dig up the threads with said requests, I will. The only reason I bothered posting any of this is because I think those who complain hyperbolically make it more difficult for those who complain respectfully and truthfully to effect change, and IMO more can be accomplished by the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/85 "2009-07-30T20:13:00Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > Because, Liberal, as we have seen in the original thread things do not get changed by just dropping it. Making a simple request then standing respectfully back and waiting for a response does not initiate change. Several posters screaming bloody murder initiates change. Yes, it is too bad that it must fall to such tactics, but why blame those who have seen reason fail too many times and now resort to escalation instead of those who choose to ignore reasonable requests and respond only when they cannot ignore escalation? This is not a singular instance, it is another example of what has come to be SOP. > > Several reasonable requests have been made that the FAQ and rules be updated. They’re being ignored. TubaDiva posted to three threads in ATMB this morning. She could have addressed those requests. Most certainly she’s aware of what is going on in this thread. There may be an excuse for her to not respond to those requests, but I can’t think of one. Neither can I. And you’re absolutely right that it often takes a near revolt to effect a policy change or the reconsideration of a judgment of policy. (I even put my own two cents worth into that thread, stating that whatever it was Seven did to me was nothing I couldn’t have handled myself, and begged that those infractions not count against him.) With respect to requests that the FAQ be updated, I’m not familiar enough with that to know the facts, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt regarding the particulars concerning TubaDiva. But you brought up the word “blame”, and I don’t really see it as blaming (or even having to blame) one side over the other. I think it is more a matter of responsibility than blame; in other words, who is responsible for keeping the rules — and by extension, the FAQ — current? Clearly, as the chief matriarch of the board, that responsibility falls to TubaDiva. That does NOT mean, however, that we can automatically assign blame to her for failure to do the updates as quickly as we demand. There could be any number of reasons why things don’t happen as quickly as we might hope. (Although it is absolutely true that, at the very least, TubaDive could update us if only to say, “We’re working on it.”) I do believe, and I may be alone in this belief, that the fairly recent stirrings and rumblings by Ed have exacerbated and escalated the emotions and impatience of users. And that happened for a variety of reasons, not the least of which were these two: (1) the capricious nature of the rules he instituted, and (2) the fact of his near absence from the boards for so very long, and then his sudden emergence, like Moses finally coming down from the mountain top with a fistful of new commandments. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc aside, it certainly seemed that that episode alone accounted for the sudden appearance, proliferation, and in some cases success of several splinter boards. But let’s take a look at the facts as they are, not as we would like them to be. And let’s be as unemotional and disinterested (not uninterested, but disinterested in the sense that a judge is disinterested in the outcome of a case — in other words, taking no sides) about it. I think it is important to note, as I’ve said many times over the years, that politics infests every discipline. Not just government. There is politics in business, in the arts, in science, in sports, and in just about anything you can think of involving two or more people, and this board is no exception. There is a relationship between Ed and TubaDiva that spans a decade or more now. You simply are not going to break that relationship with posts, no matter how many there are or by how many people. There are also the political machinations among TubaDiva and her other admins and mods, which we collectively often refer to as “circling the wagons” and that sort of thing. I really believe that there is less of that than we might imagine. As evidence, there is the resignation of Giraffe, the request for transfer from fluiddruid, this reversal by SkipMagic, and so on. I think that what they do, essentially, is pass around opinions and comments through email, which in this day and age is not much better than snail mail. So it takes some time to get things done. (Switching to something like Instant Messaging might not be as much of an improvement as you might think, given the wide variances in time zones of the mods. They could not possibly all be on IM at a moment’s notice at the same time. Well, maybe possibly, but certainly problematically.) I’m not defending the fact that TubaDiva allegedly ignores the requests you mentioned. I’m just saying that politics plays a role. Nothing will be done without Ed’s approval (although I suspect he invests a great deal of trust in TubaDiva), and no mod or admin is going to act unilaterally without TubaDiva’s direct approval or pre-approval in some cases — like the banning of socks or newbie trolls. Nor is it the case that TubaDiva is going to change her personality overnight. She has the attribute of being snippy when dealing with us due, in my opinion, to an outdated and outmoded self-view of her station and status in the scheme of things. When we approach her with demands or insults, she just naturally bristles. (And frankly, most of us are pretty much the same way.) Unfortunately, she can also bristle in this manner when there is no cause for it, as might or might not have been the case with Seven. We would have to see the whole series of PMs to know for sure. Suppose he had just finished PMing her that she’s a useless hack or a flaming bitch. Then her response, lifted from context, can seem harsher than it really was. God, I’m sorry for going on like this, so let me wrap it up. Since the administration of this board is, like everything else, infested with politics, what is required is a diplomatic approach. It isn’t (at least, I think it isn’t) the case that TubaDiva et al want us to grovel at their feet. But they want what any negotiator in a political context wants: (1) concession, and (2) respect. You have to give a little to get a little, and you have to blow some smoke up some ass in the process. That’s just the nature of the thing. Now, if in return, TubaDiva is snippy and dismissive, and simply cannot bring herself to be any other way in such a context, then nothing will change without her removal and replacement. And as we know, that just isn’t going to happen. She’s like Queen Elizabeth in that regard — likely to live a hundred more years and unlikely to abdicate. So that’s my advice. And I realize that my own reputation makes my advice as iffy as the cable guy arriving on time, but things have changed for me lately, and I can see more clearly than I did before. I post here now by default, frankly. I just don’t fit in with either Domebo or Giraffe’s board (through no fault of theirs). And maybe I don’t fit in here, either. But my roots are here. I have ten years invested. (Not to mention subscription money — above and beyond my own.) So I’ll be here. If you’d like to, feel free to PM me with your frustrations full blown, complete with invective and cursing and whatever else you’d like to do, if only to get it out of your system. You can’t hang on to grudges, dear. They’re like monsters sitting on your shoulders and biting your jugular. Sometimes, it’s best just to let things go. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/86 "2009-07-30T20:16:24Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > I’m sorry, but you are in fact wrong. You stated that “Making a simple request then standing respectfully back and waiting for a response does not initiate change.” I have three examples that refute you definitively. If you want to change your statement to include “Most of the time…”, feel free, but as originally stated, you are wrong. > > All three links are to moderators/administrators making changes based on respectful requests. Yes, the first two examples do not include the initial request from the user(s), but they both are responses to requests for change from members. If you want me to dig up the threads with said requests, I will. > > The only reason I bothered posting any of this is because I think those who complain hyperbolically make it more difficult for those who complain respectfully and truthfully to effect change, and IMO more can be accomplished by the latter. And I think sanctimonious twats who overlook larger issues to make pedantic points that aren’t really as appropriate as they think are social remora who need to examine the term ‘important’ as it applies to the subject at hand instead of ejaculating over passive aggressive swipes. Two of those links do not in fact refute a single thing I said. The first was something that was asked for for YEARS before it was implemented. The second was an example of a request for suggestions, not an independent suggestion from a poster. The third does. One out of three may not be bad in your estimation, but from where I stand it sucks. ---
**Author:** ![NinetyWt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/cc9497/32.png) [@NinetyWt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinetyWt)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/87 "2009-07-30T20:24:53Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > While you’re not required to trust our judgment, speaking as one moderator I’ve got no interest in creating an “escalation schedule” and removing any level of common sense and discretion from the process. What about a list of warnable/suspendable/bannable offenses, without an escalation schedule? ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/88 "2009-07-30T20:30:38Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > God, I’m sorry for going on like this, so let me wrap it up. Since the administration of this board is, like everything else, infested with politics, what is required is a diplomatic approach. It isn’t (at least, I think it isn’t) the case that TubaDiva et al want us to grovel at their feet. **But they want what any negotiator in a political context wants: (1) concession, and (2) respect. You have to give a little to get a little, and you have to blow some smoke up some ass in the process. That’s just the nature of the thing**. Now, if in return, TubaDiva is snippy and dismissive, and simply cannot bring herself to be any other way in such a context, then nothing will change without her removal and replacement. And as we know, that just isn’t going to happen. She’s like Queen Elizabeth in that regard — likely to live a hundred more years and unlikely to abdicate. I did want to address this, because you’re actually quite correct. Respect is a give and take position, but it is also earned by _both_ parties. I don’t start out at either a respectful or disrespectful position, but at a position of null, and the needle goes either one way or another. Marley, for example, has been far more patient with me than I with him, and I’m very willing to give his words more weight because of that. But that respect is also tempered by the actions I see in addition to the treatment I receive. (Not Marley specifically so much as the administration en toto) > [@](#): > > So that’s my advice. And I realize that my own reputation makes my advice as iffy as the cable guy arriving on time, but things have changed for me lately, and I can see more clearly than I did before. I post here now by default, frankly. I just don’t fit in with either Domebo or Giraffe’s board (through no fault of theirs). And maybe I don’t fit in here, either. But my roots are here. I have ten years invested. (Not to mention subscription money — above and beyond my own.) So I’ll be here. If you’d like to, feel free to PM me with your frustrations full blown, complete with invective and cursing and whatever else you’d like to do, if only to get it out of your system. You can’t hang on to grudges, dear. They’re like monsters sitting on your shoulders and biting your jugular. Sometimes, it’s best just to let things go. Oh, I don’t hold grudges. I do think it is important to point out what I perceive to be a pattern; I may be wrong and if corrected I have no issue with admitting it. If I’m right, however, someone may be willing to listen to what I have to say and hopefully see something worthwhile in it. But either way, I’ll step away at the end of the day, get immersed in walking the dog, watching Rachel Maddow with the Darling Man and tomorrow will be another day. Sincerely…thank you for the offer. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/89 "2009-07-30T20:31:42Z")
> [@NinetyWt](#): > > What about a list of warnable/suspendable/bannable offenses, without an escalation schedule? Was there not at some point a loose ‘three strikes you’re out’ type guideline? I say guideline as it was not a hard and fast rule. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/90 "2009-07-30T20:40:44Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > But either way, I’ll step away at the end of the day, get immersed in walking the dog, watching Rachel Maddow with the Darling Man and tomorrow will be another day. Sincerely…thank you for the offer. You’re very welcome. And I just have to say that I looooooove Rachel Maddow. The only straight-talking truth-telling truly unbiased journalist/commentary talking head currently on television. I adore her. (Sorry to all for this brief hijack.) ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/91 "2009-07-30T20:43:48Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > That’s a fair enough question. Usually, after you say that, you answer the question. Not to be all hung up on precedent or anything. But I’ve reversed some warnings and closures and I know other mods have done the same. Other times we stick by our decisions because we think we made them right. It doesn’t make us unreasonable by definition. While I’m sure nobody would dispute the fairness of your analysis of the history of the board, I’m going to skip it. > [@](#): > > However; I do believe that the direction the board has taken since pay to post has been a steady slide toward oligarchy. Your knowledge here is just lacking: the mods actually had a lot more free reign in the early days of the board. If you feel the board is going downhill, you’re not alone, but I’m not going to argue with you about it. But I’d say that if you put the blame for that on the moderating here, your blame is misplaced, and further I’d suggest doing something about it. > [@NinetyWt](#): > > What about a list of warnable/suspendable/bannable offenses, without an escalation schedule? Are the things you get warned for that secret here? “Don’t be a jerk.” In its usual forms, this means don’t insult other posters and don’t troll. Almost everything that merits a warning falls into one of those two, others are more generally ‘jerkish.’ We could discuss it but I do think we need some leeway, and ultimately if we make a list people will insist we confine ourselves only to the letter of a list. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/92 "2009-07-30T20:49:17Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > And I think sanctimonious twats who overlook larger issues to make pedantic points that aren’t really as appropriate as they think are social remora who need to examine the term ‘important’ as it applies to the subject at hand instead of ejaculating over passive aggressive swipes. Do not insult other posters in this forum, **Syntropy**. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/93 "2009-07-30T21:02:25Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Your knowledge here is just lacking: the mods actually had a lot more free reign in the early days of the board. Reason number one under my spoiler tag. > [@](#): > > If you feel the board is going downhill, you’re not alone, but I’m not going to argue with you about it. But I’d say that if you put the blame for that on the moderating here, your blame is misplaced, and further I’d suggest doing something about it. You asked for input. I gave input, not blame. What you (and the administration) choose to do with that input is entirely up to you. > [@](#): > > Are the things you get warned for that secret here? “Don’t be a jerk.” In its usual forms, this means don’t insult other posters and don’t troll. Almost everything that merits a warning falls into one of those two, others are more generally ‘jerkish.’ We could discuss it but I do think we need some leeway, and ultimately if we make a list people will insist we confine ourselves only to the letter of a list. Everything is subjective certainly. But as many here are quick to point out, this board is made up of intelligent people. Intelligent enough to understand a rule applied, even if there is disagreement. Giving a list of rules and then applying them with some latitude is hardly what I’d consider an unreasonable request. Indeed there exists such a list in the Pit and it is applied at discretion. If the only hard and fast rules are ‘don’t be a jerk’ as you have defined it, then many of the rules currently extant seem superfluous. It’s like software. The more rules you add to it, the less flexible it becomes, for both the user and the software itself. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/94 "2009-07-30T21:06:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Do not insult other posters in this forum, **Syntropy**. Acknowledged. I would point out that if board discussions were still in the Pit, the passive aggressive pettiness would be much less prevalent in ATMB. Just my pet peeve. Passive aggressiveness gives me hives. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/95 "2009-07-30T21:11:24Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > Just my pet peeve. Passive aggressiveness gives me hives. But honey, hives just look so good on you. 😉 Lordy, if it weren’t for passive aggressiveness, the South would just freeze over and die. ---
**Author:** ![NinetyWt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/cc9497/32.png) [@NinetyWt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinetyWt)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/96 "2009-07-30T21:12:52Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Are the things you get warned for that secret here? “Don’t be a jerk.” In its usual forms, this means don’t insult other posters and don’t troll. Almost everything that merits a warning falls into one of those two, others are more generally ‘jerkish.’ We could discuss it but I do think we need some leeway, and ultimately if we make a list people will insist we confine ourselves only to the letter of a list. Well, I don’t want to blather on and on about it, but specifically I’m thinking of the PM business, as in “is it a bannable/warnable offense to quote a PM”. I appreciate your taking the time to discuss all this. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/97 "2009-07-30T21:13:18Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > Reason number one under my spoiler tag. I did not invalidate your opinion, **Syntropy** , I corrected a factual error you made. I believe there was a real three-strikes-you’re-out rule at one point, and years ago people were definitely banned in shorter order than they are now. > [@](#): > > You asked for input. I gave input, not blame. What you (and the administration) choose to do with that input is entirely up to you. The body of posters is what makes the board what it is. The way the moderation is conducted has a much smaller influence on the site. > [@](#): > > But as many here are quick to point out, this board is made up of intelligent people. Intelligent enough to understand a rule applied, even if there is disagreement. It’s not simply a matter of intelligence. > [@](#): > > Indeed there exists such a list in the Pit and it is applied at discretion. Would that be the same list you just described as a terrible idea? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/98 "2009-07-30T21:16:01Z")
> [@NinetyWt](#): > > Well, I don’t want to blather on and on about it, but specifically I’m thinking of the PM business, as in “is it a bannable/warnable offense to quote a PM”. The issue isn’t that **Seven** was quoting a PM, it’s what the message said. I am pretty positive people have been warned for doing that in the past depending on the context. > [@Syntropy](#): > > I would point out that if board discussions were still in the Pit, the passive aggressive pettiness would be much less prevalent in ATMB. Yes, and the demand that the mods be reasonable and accept criticism would be mixed in with the posts calling them powermad Nazi cunts. No great loss, in my view. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/99 "2009-07-30T21:19:16Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I did not invalidate your opinion, **Syntropy** , I corrected a factual error you made. I believe there was a real three-strikes-you’re-out rule at one point, and years ago people were definitely banned in shorter order than they are now. Thank you. I thought I had remembered correctly. > [@](#): > > The body of posters is what makes the board what it is. The way the moderation is conducted has a much smaller influence on the site. I would say that ‘the recent unpleasantness’ refutes that, but I’m willing to agree to disagree. > [@](#): > > It’s not simply a matter of intelligence. It doesn’t hurt. > [@](#): > > Would that be the same list you just described as a terrible idea? No. I don’t think the list is a terrible idea, nor did I say so. I think the _rules themselves were_. I think the list and the way Gfactor is enforcing it is actually a good idea, even if I disagree with the contents of said list. That may sound semantic; it isn’t really. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738/100 "2009-07-30T21:25:21Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > No. I don’t think the list is a terrible idea, nor did I say so. I think the _rules themselves were_. I think the list and the way Gfactor is enforcing it is actually a good idea, even if I disagree with the contents of said list. That may sound semantic; it isn’t really. I do understand your point. We had a thread a few days ago about simplifying the rules and I said I support the idea, acknowledging that people are going to want to know our reasoning whether there are a lot of rules or a few. Overall, though, I’d rather treat people like adults than demand they stick to a list. I think that’s more respectful of their intelligence. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sevens-suspension/504738.md?page=6)