So a poster made a sexual comment about me, that alleged I was turned on by something. Which, by the way, is a violation of the rules y’all just told us you’re enforcing.
Was it directed at me? Yes.
Was it a comment about my sexuality in a thread about moderation, that had nothing to do with what turns or doesn’t turn me on? Yes. Who drew a Warning? Me, when I pointed out that attempting to ascribe emotions to other people was a failing strategy.
If you can’t even enforce the rules in the thread that’s debuting them, pr’aps y’all need to go back to the drawing board.
Did you report it? You have to realize that the mods are not all-seeing. They are not obsessively following every thread but instead rely on reports from the rest of us.
Correct, nor was I saying I didn’t deserve a Warning because “he did it first!”
I don’t deserve a Warning because, after someone trying to tell me what turns me on, telling them that they can’t ascribe emotions to other people, is a perfectly reasonable response.
But this does highlight the issue. Someone championing the new rules breaks them, in the thread authored to debut those rules, and you ignored that post and instead focused on someone who said in response that you couldn’t ascribe emotions to other people.
Oh, I don’t have a problem with his comments and I didn’t Report his post because I don’t support the new rules. But they do serve as a great object lesson as to what’s fucked with this policy, when an admin doesn’t even notice a rules violation of the rules that the thread was started to point out.
You know what - you’re right. colander said you were making an argument because the protestor turns you on, and you criticized her midreading abilities for that reason. You didn’t need to respond to that, but the fault was with colander’s post and you didn’t make the discussion any more personal than she did. I’ll reverse the warning.
No, here we don’t go again. This isn’t going to be another everything under the Sun about sexism thread, it’s about this one warning (which I’ve now reversed). To that end you may spare us the “let’s everybody calm down” mantra. You may have noticed that didn’t work.
Thank you Marley, shows character and grace. I appreciate your willingness to re-examine the situation. I still don’t agree that the rule under which Colander was Warned should exist, and if I had my druthers I’d vote to get that changed, but yadda yadda, I hear and obey, yadda yadda.
:sigh: I can’t stop thinking of Marley. Wondering where he could be; who he is with; what is he thinking; is he thinking of me; and whether he’ll ever return someday.
Wouldn’t the problem be with the quoting?
The rest of it I’d need a team of lawyers to untangle, and then retangle, and then submit a motion for a change of venue. Perhaps the south of France, but no time soon, what with the summer heat almost upon us.
