Grandwino could have been warned for being a jerk without any mention whatsoever of whether **SA **was currently or ever had been a jerk. How easy would it have been to simply finish at:
A clear and concise warning, but despite SA breaking no rules in this thread the moderator felt the need to continue on and effectively say, “That guys a dick, you shouldn’t act like him”.
In a forum where posters are repeatedly warned to keep things civil and avoid personal jabs I think its very bad form coming from a moderator. Clearly its “do as I say, not as I do” in here.
I’m sorry but that sounds like a straight up threat to me. And I have no dog in this fight.
I appreciate greatly the work the mods do around here. But as some others have noted, IMO they really do need to be more “professional” when doing actual modding. And not sounding like they might mod your ass when they aren’t being mods if you piss them off enough.
I think many people forget that not only should there not be impropriety, but even the APPEARANCE of impropriety.
And on that standard, I think the mods fall too short too often for my tastes.
You’re right. It’s definitely not a board for everybody.
(AKA - This is the way the moderation has been here for forever. “As it happens, I am the fucking hall monitor.”) And it comes straight from the top. I like it.
Good thing, then, that nobody’s said that ignorance of a mod instruction is not a defense, isn’t it? We have, in fact, repeatedly said the opposite. The issue in this thread is that Starving Artist saw the mod note, and made a deliberate decision not to read it. We could edit the thread title, change the color of the mod note, and set off a fireworks display, and it wouldn’t change the situation in this thread one bit, because visibility is not the issue. The mod note was not overlooked, it was ignored.
Yes, certainly. But if you repeatedly ignore mod warnings and get banned, “I didn’t read the thread” isn’t IMO a good excuse.
Not that I am saying SA ignores warnings, but if one doesn’t read a thread before posting to it, one might miss something important. I am taking the mod’s word for it that Starvie’s not on the brink or anything, any more than any other poster who has become persona non grata for one reason or another.
I would quibble on whether it deserved a Warning or just a mod note, but tempers were running high in that thread for various reasons and I can see how that might affect how seriously a transgression of that sort would be taken. That’s a judgment call by the mods, and that’s why they get the big bucks.
I have a little more trouble with the part about “Starving Artist can be a jerk but you still can’t break the rules”, but that’s just a bigger quibble.
I have even more trouble with other posters saying “I dare you (to break the rules)” and “you are implying that I am a liar” and suchlike. I would have hoped to see the usual “take it to the Pit” at least. But so it goes.
What the hell are you talking about? A threat would be something like this:
A “straight up threat” must include, y’know, a threat. It must include a statement that the speaker will do something bad.
There might be an implied threat here. The implied threat is, “If you continue implying I’m a liar, I’m going to click the report post button.” If that’s a threat, it’s a completely fine threat to make.
The overreactions to UP’s posts here and in the other thread are ridiculous.
Is it against the rules to imply things now? I know Jr Modding is against the rules and I know making threats against other posters is against the rules, and apparently making jabs at SA is against the rules, but I"m not clear on this other thing.
I don’t think it’s at all possible to discuss the appropriateness of someone’s words and the reaction of other people to it if that person is given complete ownership of the interpretation of their words and no one can dispute them or be guilty of accusing them of being a liar.
Fortunately, it’s been recently reiterated that the rule against calling people liars only applies in GD & Elections. So while I’m not looking to focus on whether anyone is a liar, I am comfortable commenting on what interpretation of their words seems most likely to me, if that happens to be the topic under discussion.
Come on billfish678, I know you - you’re a sharp poster, think about this and stop playing to the ref’. I do not work for the message board. I have no Moderator powers. I have no special access. I have no influence to even begin to make any “threat”, let alone carry out such. I work for the Straight Dope, as I have for the last 11 years continuously. I do not nor do I wish to get involved moderating this board. I’m not the glutton for punishment that the current moderators are.
The only “threat” from what I said is that I’m not going to let stand without rebuttal someone implying I’m a liar.
You have very high standards, my friend, for an internet message board.
I told you how your statement came off as an random observer (and I think your comments in the thread(s?) in question were a bit suspect IMO as well)… Note the IMO in my posts as well.
And, yes, I have high standards for that kinda stuff. Sure, you can’t meet them, because reality and shit, but to shrug and say WTF? why even try is bullshit IMO.
I’m not going to spend much time defending my point of view or logic or whatever. I’m just throwing this out because if I’m thinking it, I doubt I’m the only one.
This thread has veered from the original complaint, which I think has been adequately answered. Since it seems to be devolving into posters sniping at one another about other issues, I think it’s time to close it.
