The problem I see with playing *a little bird told me * and posting stuff here that was gathered and posted on the anon board is that IMHO it seems that these anon people are trying to bully the Mods here into doing what they want done by putting it out the way they do.
The anon posters are not in charge here but if they are allowed to bully our Mods then they may as well be. So I agree that this sort of thing needs to be done via email. It can not be easy to Mod the SDMB, it is a large board. Mods are not paid here, this is not a job for them, they do it because the care about the board. They have real lives and jobs away from the boards, cut them some slack.
I think you’re assuming facts not in evidence. Junior modding is against the rules. CarnalK was clearly junior modding. So he got a warning. I don’t think that’s due to the mods being upset at some people who’re sad enough to spend their time outside of the Dope… still focused on the Dope… in order to fling shit.
I mean, honestly… if there was some crazy homeless man going through your garbage and raving at you because you use nutrasweet, would you really modify your behavior or feel shame? If this lunatic who hasn’t seen bath water in a decade finds a dirty magazine of yours that you threw away and stands in front of your house telling passers by that you’re a pervert, does that mean that you thinking he’s an obnoxious schmuck really implies that you’re upset that he pulled a “Gotcha!” ?
If it had been in email, I’d agree. Hell ,if it has been after the banning and CarnalK had Pitted the mods I’d agree with you too. But that wasn’t the case. Old warnings were dredged up in order to make the specific point “Desmo should be banned.”
You missed the point completely, Dave. This wasn’t about being embarrassed of ‘not doing a job properly’. I’ve made mistakes–and will again-- and have absolutely no problem apologizing for 'em, correcting the problem and going on, no harm and no foul. Check my record on that one.
What was completely wrong was whipping up a public drive to ban a poster based on a completely spurious political bias on the part of mods. That’s mob rule, and it sucks–when anybody does it, for whatever reason. Banning is the final dead damned serious action here. It isn’t taken at all lightly or carelessly, which is what posters have wanted reassurance about all along.
Think about it. Do you really want the Dope to splinter along political lines? And then, hey, maybe religious ones! Hell, toss in smokers vs. nonsmokers, SUV drivers and all the other benchmark indicators of opinion. There are plenty of die-hard, rabid believers on plenty of ‘sides’–and more than a few of them are very willing to demand that their opponents be banned. And there’s no lack of nitpicking to try to ‘prove’ technicalities to get them banned, if that’s what it takes.
If anybody truly believes the mods here are so hive-minded that we march in lockstep on any issue, he/she is flat out nuts. Or willfully deluded. If anything, we bend over backwards to be fair and methodical, and we’re never going to satisfy everyone. Fine. So be it. But lynch mobs are still wrong and easily turned, ultimately to the danger of everyone, no matter they’re rationalized. We certainly aren’t going to permit lynch mobs as fun spectator events for bottomfeeders who pick their targets at whim. Posters don’t have to be popular or even widely accepted, but they shouldn’t have to fear organized drives to remove them.
You bet this disgusts me. It’s petty, vile behavior, no matter how it’s rationalized. Posters don’t have to be popular or even widely accepted, but they shouldn’t have to fear lynch mobs.
Does “junior modding” mean reminding fellow posters of the rules? I don’t know where the line is drawn because, as I’m sure you’ll admit, you’ve been explaining to a fare-thee-well the proper process for comments on bannings. And yet, I’ve seen repeated remarks by mods that imply the encouragement of a self-policing board, in which members take care of, for example, a hate speaker. But whatever, I don’t understand how CarnalK was junior modding but you are not. Could you explain?
In general? No, but I’d say that call is up to the mods, not me.
I don’t grok. Elaborate please?
I’ve not seen any comments by mods that suggest this ‘taking care of’ a hate speaker involves anything other than pretty standard Doper disection. I’m also only aware of mods encouraging posters to report posts… do you have a cite or two?
I see a substanative difference between commenting on an already commited mod action and demanding that the mods should follow a certain course of action, especially WRT banning a poster.
That doesn’t make any sense. How can you declare that “CarnalK was clearly junior modding” when that call is up to the mods, not you?
I don’t know what you want explained. It was a simple, straightforward comment. Again, you’ve been explaining to a fare-thee-well the proper process for comments on bannings. Here is one of several comments you’ve made: In any case, it’s not our place as posters to discuss if another poster should be banned. It’s also not our place as posters to be privy to whatever deals and agreements have been reached by posters and mods in regard to continued posting on the Dope. There is no reason that his points couldn’t have been made in email, and a few reasons why they shouldn’t have been made on the Dope.
Well, let’s go one step at a time. Before this becomes a side discussion that scatters all over the place, let’s deal with the question of junior modding, and specifically why CarnalK was doing it but you were not.
So do I. But let’s not pretent that that was my point. You are describing the proper way to discuss bannings — by e-mail, you say, not on the boards, etc. If all you’re doing is parroting a mod, then is your post necessary, since the mod already said it?
I have no idea what a fare-thee-well is, other than a parting phrase used between friends and a great line in a Bob Dylan song.
As for my comments, I don’t see anywhere I’ve stated them as rules, although I have stated that we shouldn’t do such things. I’m pretty sure that I’ve been keeping to non-modly turf.
Short answer, because he was acting like a mod and saying, in essence “Well, he’s racked up the right warnings, he should be banned now.” All I’ve been saying is that certain behaviors are not our purview as posters. I’d imagine that if, before he was warned, I’d pointed out his post and said “That’s against the rules! You’re going to be warned!” I’d have been taken to task for junior modding, too.
Personally I’d prefer to see almost all ‘pointing out of the rules’ marked verboten. I think it’d be best for the place if when we thought someone was crossing the limits, we’d report it to a mod and not step in ourselves. YMMV.
First, no, strictly speaking I don’t have to post, and yes the mods have already spoken. But the issue is now in the common space of the Dope, and I’m following the long standing Doper tradition of throwing a pair of pennies at anybody who can’t run away fast enough.
My point about discussing bannings isn’t so much about rules, as it is about what’s decent and good for a community. Without the rules in place I’d still say it was extremely gauche to open a debate on whether or not another poster should be banned. I think it would be an extremely slimey place to visit if there were a dozen Pit threads at any given moment rehashing all of various posters’ warnings, digging through every post they’ve made in an attempt to get them banned…
As a caveat: I think that this issue partially falls into the domain of ‘rules lawyering’. Just as the statute on ‘being a jerk’ is purposefully left somewhat vague, perhaps so too is ‘junior modding’ left up to the judgement of the mods.
I wasn’t starting a ban drive. I was pointing out that you can’t remember when you give a final warning. I don’t care how busy you are, you look fucking stupid when someone gets four warnings after your “last one”. All this is embarrassment, not any delicate sensitivities over improper posting.
Everyone else is held to their previous posts, but not the mods. Thats “stirring up shit”.
Wrong-o, boyo. We’ve stated, quite explicitly, that we don’t pore over warnings, nor go looking to ban people. Did we ever promise to be johnny-on-the spot about banning anyone? No. If anything, we’re extremely cautious about it. I had a note to myself to look up Desmos’s record but just plain hadn’t gotten around to it yet. It takes some time, and we were short-staffed at the moment. Monitoring active threads took precedence. Should I have been faster about it? Probably. Does it worry me? No. Have I ever denied making mistakes, or refused to apologize and make problems good? No. Doesn’t bother me at all.
What was, and is, dead wrong is you making a point to search out the records of any poster you don’t like for the direct purpose of getting them banned. Pit anyone you want, idiot. Argue 'em face to face. Knock yourself out. Look for what they’ve posted earlier, if that will support your argument. That’s what it’s there for. Fair game. Digging up warnings for people you happen to disagree with isn’t. It’s junior modding; it’s never been permitted, so stop whining.
But we will not permit you, or anyone else, to use this board and its archives for witchhunts just because burning people at the stake is a fun past-time for you.
We won’t play the game of forensic victimhood with you. “Look, look! Back when poster X got a warning but poster Y said almost the same thing, so that proves a conspiracy! Let’s even up the record and get the sonuvabitch banned!”
You take pride in stirring shit. So you did, on our board, and got called on it, fool. Stop whining about it. We will not allow you, or any other shit-stirrer-for-kicks, to drive witchhunts for any agenda. What next? Fat people? Christians? SUV drivers? People who just annoy you?
I haven’t the slightest clue as to your political leanings, or any other opinions you hold for that matter, CarnalK, and don’t care a whoop either. Your behavior is despicable.
I know the word “whining” has a nice derisive ring to it but it’s pretty immature to misuse it so.
Simple fact: I pointed out your error, you went apeshit.
If you check your fabulous moderator records you’ll see I never interacted with Desmo in a negative fashion (I’m not even searching on it, maybe I’m wrong). After you’ve done that and refuted the “People who just annoy you?” bullshit, maybe you can switch tactics.
Bah, but whatever. I’ve got no option but to take the official warning as is unless an administator has the guts to overrule an ominous ruling. So be it.
Hmmmm. An apology from me is certainly in order. I certainly did not mean the moderators/administrators ought to parent the boards or that they should be partial to or practice affirmative action for conservatives (now wouldn’t that be an interesting scenario - practicing affirmative action for someone who may not agree with affirmative action). Your Timmy model is exactly what my intentions were and where I went wrong.
Nah, just a bottom feeder using his name in vain–with a sly little underscore, of course. Guess the idiot never noticed Manny hated sock puppets with a passion. Flattering to him, it wasn’t.
