Funny “fail”. That’s yer problem. 
The problem is that you’re completely out of touch with reality. You’re very condescending, and not as informed as you present yourself to be, but then you have to go whipping out lines like “macfag” and pretend like it was a harmless little joke that shouldn’t offend anyone because technically it didn’t break any rules.
You got moderated, not even a real warning, just a reminder, and here you are bitching about it. The first response in GQ is supposed to be a serious answer, and a little humor is ok, but you weren’t trying for a funny little pun or play on words, you were trying out offensive humor. Der Trihs has the only known immunity card for offensive behavior, so if you want to keep up with your schtick, you’re going to have to go get it from him, or keep getting moderated.
The first paragraph of your response left me very ??? - it was a complete non sequitur for the specific question I had asked, and that is not cool in GQ. If I wanted to joke around and debate about Mac products, I would have posted my question somewhere else. It wasn’t a big deal to me (you get pretty good at just ignoring noise around here), but it wasn’t appropriate for the first answer in GQ.
Anyone else get the feeling the umbrage level was raised not so much because of the lack of overall humor, not so much for the thin obscenity/slur in the wrong forum, but because it was an irrelevant Pit-like shitscreed against Apple? An absolutely tangential turdding on a product is generally frowned upon anyway, particularly in early responses, but this is so fucking hackneyed (Apple Sux! No, Windows Sux! No, Linux Blows!) as to be wearisome. I don’t know if someone who came responded to a question about Fords with a pent-up/constipated shit-on-Ford response before moving on to an answer would get a similar note (NOTE, just a note to keep the tenor of dialogue fairly consistent and relatively shit-free), but since it comes up often enough more than a backhanded slap of toilet paper isn’t going to be taken as humourous (except, I suppose, by those who like to sport *Calivn peeing *stickers).
You could have made the same joke with milder language, and it would have come off a lot better. As it was, you turned what could have been a tongue-in-cheek topical joke into a nasty little nerdrage screed that was completely inappropriate in the context.
The question is if mini rants or profanity, included with actual factual information, are against the rules. They don’t appear to be. Nor are there ‘appropriateness standards’ in place. Of course, this wasn’t a warning. It was a threat of future warning. Maybe a gentle reminder of etiquette would be better than threatening to warn someone over something that isn’t actually against the rules.
I’d be fine with such a rule, but as of right now, there isn’t one.
And really, none of you are particularly funny anyway. Neither are most of you the classy, well-informed GQ experts that you’re comparing the OP to. None of you have the right to not be potentially offended, nor are you in a solid position to judge other posters.
Even if you’re right that it wasn’t funny and it was a bit over-the-top, there is, fortunately, no result that can stem from your displeasure absent a blatant bending of the rules.
And I believe you failed in both endeavors - answering the question or being funny. What you did was post your WAG about what the OP could try without adding any technical direction to the OP and you took the opportunity to post a trite, overused joke. Neither of which is the purpose of the existence of GQ. I applaud the Mods for this one.
You may want to revisit the thread. There’s a gigantic derailing taking place, all a result from your referencing the Gizmodo incident, all of which began well before this thread was started, let alone your claim there wasn’t any hijacking.
No, that’s not the question. More rules are what we need less of around here. What we need more of are posters who think twice and post once. Please don’t make us have to draw bright line rules about every tiny possible occurrence on the Board.
It’s not called “General Questions and Pissy Little Rants and Insults To Other People.”
And once again, the number one rule. From the FAQ:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_sdmb_rules
Yes, because it’s so obviously better that we let the esteemed mod staff make the wise and thoughtful decisions that we are so used to. I disagree with you; I think we need less knee-jerk reactionism and arbitrary one-off rulemaking by the staff. Bright line rules are the only fair way to do things. And, contrary to your post, there is another path besides making little rules to cover every eventuality that gets someone’s panties in a twist – it’s called not getting your panties in a twist about minor one-off “infractions”.
The mods need to step up and make rules and stick to them.
:rolleyes: Too late.
What the fuck is wrong with the mods shaping the tenor of discussion on a slightly ad hoc basis? I may not agree with every modding, but they do a damn fine job—bright line or not—of keeping the board a lot cleaner and better run than others.
So a mod comes in and tells someone to not to post anger-infused diatribes in GQ. Not warn, not ban, not lock the thread, just give direction. But because it wasn’t stemming solely from a carefully delineated rule, that bothers you?
Yeah, it is better to let the mod staff make judgment calls, because any bright-line set of rules is going to have plenty of gray area. And it’s not wholly arbitrary: From what I understand a lot of modding questions get bandied about amongst them, and there is this entire forum dedicated to member-driven questioning of mod decisions.
If you’re so concerned about panty-twisting, perhaps you should sit down for a spell and do some unwinding yourself. Maybe it will help you appreciate the irony of complaining here about too much judgment-based modding while simultaneously being a joke in the Pit for insufferable Jr. Modding.
Well, I disagree with your assessment as to the proper course of moderating a message board. “Direction” is one thing. Threatening to warn someone (which is pretty much “knock it off or we’ll ban you” is quite another. “Shaping the discussion” is a fine euphemism for enforcing the groupthink. I personally believe that when a board becomes hyper-concerned with policing the viewpoints of its members, it’s only a matter of time before the board degenerates from an interesting community to a sad set of self-congratulatory lamers. Please excuse me for caring about such things.
It’s frankly quite telling to me that the mere fact that I disagree with some judgment-based arbitrary system seems to get you so riled up. It’s a bit of a conservative and staid viewpoint you have, which is of course fine, even though I think you’re wrong.
I also disagree that they do a great job at keeping the board cleaner (whatever that means). I do think they do a very good job at eliminating dissent from the standard memes. I also think a lot of posters do a very good job at driving away or at least attempting to drive away diverse viewpoints, as indicated by your insulting tone and obvious thin skin here in ATMB. You’re engaging in quite a bit of “Jr. Modding” yourself; it’s frankly quite sad that you and others like you are unable to comprehend the difference between my exhortations to other posters and your praise of moderator action towards people you disagree with.
Mods should be like boxing referees - the less you see of them, the better the experience. I never asked any of you to volunteer as mods. You have your position of your own choosing, and you shouldn’t need praise for when you are doing something right. But… you should expect criticism when you are doing something that is deemed harmful to the board experience, ie. sticking your oar in when there is no need.
Anyone who can get offended by the word “macfag” needs a serious perspective test.
IMHO, the unwarranted mini-rant against Apple was really questionable in a GQ thread.
As for the use of “Macfag”? Personally, I may not have used the term myself, or I would have come up with a better word, but it definitely conjures up the desired image. I don’t find it offensive myself but there are those that may; gay, Apple owners, or both.
Macfag is offensive? Here’s a bandaid for a bleeding heart.
In my view, Rumor_Watkins does not have a career as a comedian in his future.
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny right there.
How is that not the question? Nobody wants to make a rule for every little thing, but it looks like he got his wrist slapped for giving what has been identified as a “pissy little rant” while offering an actual solution to the OP’s problem.
I wonder if Colibri would’ve had as much of a problem if Rumor provided the serious answer first.