As long as I’m being held to their content, I’ll go search through all 3600+ posts in Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread… and make sure there’s no applicable mod notes with warnings that otherwise might apply. Good idea.
I agree it’s not always workable to be informed of all mod notes on long threads. I think if there is honest mistake that violates mod instruction that wouldn’t otherwise be a warn able offense then it should be looked at generously.
Frankly, and this is probably my own ignorance, but I’m not seeing the warnable comment in SA’s linked post. Honest request, can that be elaborated on?
Again, I’m fairly ignorant on the topic and I want to be sensative to not offer unintended offense.
We are all reasonable (for the most part) people (for the most part), and if someone genuinely doesn’t see a mod note - either because they were posting at the same time as the moderator, or because it was on page 2 of a 15 page thread, we’re probably not going to slap them with a warning. In this case, we have a poster who admits to seeing the mod note, and just not caring enough to read the whole thing. That’s a substantially different situation than the one you and Morgenstern are talking about.
MODERATOR WARNING.
For Grand Wino.
Being a jerk(and essentially trolling SA) for bringing up an extraneous subject which was deemed off limits years ago. Sure, SA can be a jerk sometimes, but don’t try to outdo him.
samclem
Agreed.
I’m not really seeing any gray area here. There was a mod note, and instead of reading it, you skimmed it and decided it didn’t apply to you. Then you read more of the thread, and either didn’t notice that the whole transgender angle had been dropped, or did notice and decided to bring it back?
I also don’t see that much difference between “didn’t bother to read it” and “didn’t want to waste time reading a note meant for someone else.” It seems like two parts of the same sentiment:
I didn’t bother reading it BECAUSE I didn’t see the point in wasting my time on a note meant for someone else.
Maybe so I don’t make the same mistake he/she/they did?
My reaction was almost opposite yours.
I saw the moderation of adaher
Since it was indeed a different paragraph I dropped down and saw the warning was to us all.
And I appreciated that the exchange was added below that so I knew exactly what not to do.
As we say, YMMV. But this much variance is a little hard to understand. If you hope to dodge this warning, you better call Racehorse Haynes. Or at least his dog bite defense.
This may be the first time Frylock and I agree on something. Somehow that frightens me just a little. 
When I mod note a particular post, that’s not just an admonition to that poster, it serves as an example of the kind of posts that I don’t want to see in that thread. And I frequently add general instructions to mod notes in which I have quoted a particular poster.
Any mod note could be relevant for subsequent posts in the thread. It’s always a good idea to read them in their entirety.
Ummm … not to throw GrandWino under the bus but why doesn’t he get a mod note?
Every now and then a poster will get a warning through honest accident. Luckily most warnings are not instabans.
- Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.*
Why should he? He’s well aware of the instructions not to bring the topic up gratuitously. He posted in your complaint thread when you received a warning because you failed to read my note to Ludovic.
At any rate, let’s not rehash that issue here. Anyone wishing to discuss GrandWino’s warning should take it to another thread.
Whoops, nm. I had only read every-other-word of Colibri’s last post.
Well, thats just super professional now, isn’t it.
n/m
(I think I got the bolding right to match yours)
I’m not looking to start a fight but ----- how professional do we expect for free? And “being a jerk” is actually written into the rules somehow, right? Did I wince a little at the start of the last line there? A tiny bit yes. But in context of that warning, it made sense and made everything pretty clear.
The guy started a thread in ATMB and there a moderator called him a jerk. I mean, if there was one forum where you would expect a little decorum from the mods I thought it would be this one. Guess not.
Makes all those admonishments to keep things civil seem rather empty, but hey, que sera.
What’s the number one rule of the board?
Don’t Be A Jerk.
How, precisely, are moderators expected to state that rule without, you know, stating that someone is a jerk?
Was he being a jerk in this thread?
Did the moderators have to moderate him for being a jerk in this thread?
Or was it simply a potshot against an easy target over past occurrences?
I’m lost. “He” who? SA? Please show where any moderator moderated him for being a jerk in this thread.
GrandWino? He did admit to posting while drunk, or at least tipsy, and forgetting that there was a rule about making such statements outside the Pit.
High, but the point stands.