And just for clarity’s sake:
I can say: “That’s a goddamned lie and you know it” but I can’t say, “You’re a goddamned liar and you know it.” Right?
Again, NO. I thought I spelled this out very plainly the first time. There was a debate about whether you are allowed to call another poster a liar regardless of the specific wording.
I have no idea why you would conclude that, since that’s nothing like what Marley said.
That might get modded because it’s not clear if you are talking about the content of the post (saying it’s false) or saying the poster is deliberately lying.
Fair. Let’s say I quote the section of their post that is clearly a lie and say, “This is a lie.” That’s cool? But not, “This is a lie and you know it,” right?
Which was, or should have been, a complete waste of time. Because calling someone “a goddamned liar” or saying “I need a shower after talking to you” is clearly and obviously an insult. Therefore you did not need to resolve your debate before moderating the exchange.
Regards,
Shodan
The OP asked several different questions, and we wanted to respond to all of them - so it doesn’t matter if you think we wasted our time. The question of whether or not the post was insulting was easy and there wasn’t any disagreement about that. We spent a little more time hashing out the broader question of whether or not you can call another poster a liar.
If it’s clear you are talking about an idea and not the poster - which usually means they’re repeating an argument made by someone else - it’s OK. But it’s always better to say someone is just wrong instead of suggesting they are being deceptive.
What if I were to say something like:
FFS, people, GROW UP!
Would that be considered an insult? (need answer fast)
Yes. And threadshitting.
Is it just me or is it beginning to feel somewhat claustrophobic around here?
I find that reading ATMB less helps - and I’m not being sarcastic. If you read too many threads here at the wrong time you can get the impression that the board is a hotbed of seething discontent and arbitrary moderation and who knows where it’s all headed, and if you go read the other forums you usually see that things are pretty much the same as they always are. I suppose there’s more than one way to interpret that.
I usually stay out of here unless the subject matter piques my interest; the claim of no rules for IMHO seemed like something to look in on, and then I got caught up in the ModkerfuffleTM.
What you’re actually asking here, I suppose, is: Okay, who started this shit anyway (in that MRM thread)? Well, for starters, everybody started piling on right from Post #2, but it didn’t start getting, you know, actually nasty until all the way in at . . . Post #19:
. . . and that was a male poster who wrote that, BTW.
Leading immediately to the next post:
Personally, related specifically to this, I’m seriously PO’d that ALL men’s issues are met with the standard “Look who isn’t getting his daily pussy” meme. You see misogyny with every “Boob Pix” snark, but I see serious misandry with every shitty mention of that old Vitamin P trope. There can be utterly no discussion of men’s issues without this coming up. (Go ahead . . . I’m waiting for it . . . )
So, to keep this post appropriate for an ATMB thread, I wonder: What, if anything, should mods be doing about that? Personally, I’m all for greater freedom of discussion rather than less. So this kind of incivility needs to reach some certain really nasty level before the mods should step in. (Yes, I felt you did that with your goddamn liar remark — not just those two words, but that whole paragraph.)
Am I’m sore that, in light of the misogyny flame-up, mods have gone to the lengths of modding those two minor lines (by HL and AR in the Sorority Queen thread), and even seeming to agree with the suggestion that we need to be careful with the word “hysteria” — that’s serious overkill — but every one of those stupid Vitamin P posts is an insult, and derails whatever anyone was trying to say. Does that violate any Board rule? What rule is this board missing, to keep that shit civil? It’s not up there with “goddamn liar”. But I’d call it on threadshitting. The MRM thread was full of that. And upon reviewing (as you suggest), I’m going with Post #19 as the start of the train wreck in the MRM thread.
No rule, but perhaps timely reports is what it’s missing? Next time report it right away and see what happens.
…especially in light of a recent ruling that calling an entire group of people idiots is suspendable.
No, we did not suggest that.
That would appear to be the answer, yes.
Marley23, thank you (sort of, partly) for some of your recent posts, especially #39 and #56 above. You’ve sort-of addressed and answered at least some things I’ve having a problem with here, but not quite all.
I kinda wanted to take the trouble to respond to #39 point-by-point, but when you begin a post by writing:
you make it clear that it wouldn’t be exactly welcome.
And that is so, even though I make it a point, at least, to keep my language temperate (which not everyone does around here). But you’ve made clear that you just don’t want to hear much, if any, more about this. And I’m not wanting to go all prr on you (yet), only to get the “final solution” that he got.
Yet, despite my better judgement to STFU already, I’ve got a few remarks I can’t quite contain.
You accused me (correctly) of accusing you of “sticking your heads in the sand until it just fades away”. IOW, if it’s over a week old, that fact alone prohibits further discussion. Well, that alone could prohibit one, sometimes, from actually, you know, making a responsive remark to anything you might say here. Maybe you just didn’t cotton to the wording I used there.
(And let me clarify this, BTW: When I say “you” referring to a moderation issue, I mean “any one of you mods specifically, or more generally, all of youse mods collectively”, according to the context.)
Comes now one of youse mods — yes, you Marley23 — with this:
Uh, actually, one of youse mods (guess who) did suggest that, in an ATMB thread (on guess-which-subject) that you don’t want me to harp on any more because it’s over a week old. What, precisely, did that mod write? See this post and the immediately subsequent one to find out. (In case your browser, like mine, doesn’t always position correctly, it’s Post #237 and #238.) (No, I’m not going to quote it here for all the world to see again. It’s stale, right?)
Oh, upon just looking back there, I see that the same mod had earlier written a similar mod note here at Post #234, advising caution using “hysteria” or “hysterical”.
Yet now you deny that “we” mods ever suggested that, also advising that last week’s business is no longer open for discussion.
I’ll stop now before Ed Zotti feels the need to jump in. One just knows there’s a prr final solution coming down the pike when that happens, amirite?
It does not in any way prohibit further discussion. It does make it a bit less likely we’ll take action on a post, especially if that means giving a warning. I was trying to put that in context, especially because you seemed to have waited about a week to start this discussion and were accusing us of stalling you because we took about a day to talk about the issue.
I disliked the accusation, not the wording.
The mod (me) precisely wrote “Using terms like “hysterical” seems particularly ill-advised” in a thread about misogyny. I went on to explain why I felt it wasn’t a good choice of words - and the poster then admitted he chose that word deliberately to prove a point essentially annoying people. Nowhere did I say there was any kind prohibition on the word. I said it was a bad choice of words in that thread because it was likely to irritate people, and what do you know, the poster was already aware of that because he was using it for that exact reason.
I never suggested it. I made a mod note in the context of one discussion, and there’s nothing there to suggest the use of the word itself is discouraged. You have to try pretty hard to read the post that way.
Just to return to this: you’re commenting on your own accusation here, not my response. You said initially
The gist of my response to that was that the thread and the post were already “stale” when you opened this ATMB thread, so our response time is neither here nor there. We were discussing the questions you asked, not stalling you. I was trying to point out that it was unfair to accuse us of stalling you because we took a day or two to discuss some of your questions when you appeared to have waited about five days to ask them in the first place.
And pseudotriton ruber ruber got that final warning after many years of dickish behavior and petty complaints. You’re not nearly on that level, and I hope you’re not planning to get there. 
I really really had to sit on my hands to restrain myself from suggesting exactly this, although I’ve been thinking of it.
And if I (or anyone) really begin to report these things timely and regularly, every time I (or anyone) see it, I really really think I already know what will happen. I could be wrong about what I think will happen, but if I’m not wrong, it won’t end well. So I sit on my hands, mostly. You’ll note that this entire thread is kinda out of character for me; I usually stay the hell out of any disputes like this, and rarely even participate at all in “those kinds” of threads.
But I stuck my neck into the fray here. As ladyfoxfyre correctly observed, I’m (more than slightly) prickled over all this.
As I noted above, I already sense that I’m treading the fine line at the edge of getting the prr treatment, which I fear may already be brewing here.
ETA: Ninja’ed by Marley23 last two posts above, which he wrote while I was composing all of this post.