Per Ed’s suggestion here, this is to discuss the warnings given by Colibri in the Bad Precedent thread.
Personally, I don’t think that either warning was justified. The one against Jeff was entirely over the top.
It’s going to boil down the difference between “personal insult” and “personal attack”, as well as the mods’ willingness to draw a line between the two. The latter won’t happen, furthering the capriciousness of on-the-fly moderation, tears will be shed, and then Ed will shut the thread down before there’s actual closure.
Or maybe cooler heads and a more objective view will prevail.
God I hope so. Reading the thread, it really reads like it might have been easy to get caught up in the heat of the moment, and Colibri acted on that. Maybe there was a mod off-duty at the time who can go through and take a more objective reading of the situation.
Oh, what do you know, it’s Sleeps again. I’m not surprised.
They don’t generally gainsay each other publicly, except perhaps to remark that possibly under similar circumstances they have may have responded differently, etc etc. They have a long tradition, for better or worse, or either responding as a united front or recusing themselves.
To follow up Munch’s predictions, I imagine we’ll also see Tomndebb appear to happily play his role as barracks lawyer and cast aspersions at vague groups of people and their motivations.
PS aClockworkmelon, rubberneckers need to stand back behind the barricades. Don’t make me use the word “fucking” in your direction.
Jeff–since the OP is really about Colibri’s moderation, why don’t we just leave out remarks like this.
If you have a probably with tomndebb, starting a new thread would probably be a better solution. I doubt you’ll see tom respond to this one.
nm
This is not helping. This is a forum for discussing moderation and the rules here, not taking shots at people who have a different opinion on a ruling. Please stay on topic.
Let me just ask this, Jeff: what were you thinking? twickster raised the issue with the rest of us. Most or all of the staff agreed the ruling was a mistake and the warning should be taken back. It took about two days, which was too much for some people (life gets in the way), but the system worked. In this post it looks like you were being a jerk about it. Maybe you were trying to mock her original instruction about the word ‘cunt,’ but if that was the idea, it didn’t work. This was not a good move.
I’m not Jeff, but it looked to me that he was poking a little fun / sarcasm at twickster’s use of the word “fucking” in the post that linked to her retraction and apology.
Like I said in the other thread, if you want an apology to be taking seriously, maybe dropping f-bombs in random spots isn’t the best way to go about it.
I’ve done my share of complaining about mod decisions over the past few days, enough so that it seems i’ve been lumped, by one or two mods, into some amorphous group called malcontents or troublemakers. I don’t believe that’s what i am, but whatever.
Anyway, i have no desire to beat dead horses, so i’m not going to offer much of an opinion on this main issue in this thread, but i did want to point out that i thought Jeff’s post, linked by Marley23, was more of a mocking of this twickster post, in which she says:
It seemed to me that Jeff was simply mirroring twickster’s own use of “fucking,” which in itself seemed somewhat abrasive, coming as it did in a post where she admitted that her moderating decision had been wrong.
On preview, beaten to it by SoulFrost.
Yeah… but you took your time and didn’t misspell “taken”… 
That makes sense to me. Still not a good idea to do that in that particular situation, but we’ll see what Colbri’s take is.
Even for this board, this is pretty touchy. How do you get ‘dropping f-bombs in random spots’ out of a post that used the word ‘fucking’ one time? She withdrew the warning, she apologized, she posted in ATMB to draw everybody’s attention to it. In the process she said “fucking” once. Maybe she was a little on edge about it, but that happens. She did the right thing by reversing the warning.
Not to be pissy or anything, but shouldn’t this part of the discussion be in the [unfortunately and preemptively] closed thread, or at least tabled until the question at hand is settled? Colibri’s official warning was based on what he’s (she?) calling a “personal attack”, which many of us are claiming is pretty capricious and out-of-the-blue. At the very least, could we talk about the difference between a “personal attack” and a “personal insult”? Specifically as it relates to CK Dex’s fairly detailed description of a personal insult (outlined, linked and quoted in the closed thread) would be where you guys should start.
You know what I like? Brevity and humour. twickster’s incongruous use of the word “fucking” tickled my funny bone, as did tom’s use of the phrase “barracks lawyer”. Marley, you should be so lucky that everyone who has a problem with the moderation has a sense of humour like me. Did I bog down this forum and burden the moderating staff with endless debates? Did I even post defense of my warning except to make a joke? Did I encourage others to do so? A couple good-natured shots and I’ve got moderators tripping over themselves to talk at me and look foolish.
PS If there is a 48 hour waiting period for ruling reversals can I be expecting to get mine tomorrow? No vulgarities in the apology please; they make Colibri upset.
(too soon?)
I agree that she did the right thing, but her “fucking” seems somehow tacked on to the rest of the sentence. It just doesn’t flow right. It seems–to me, just my opinion–randomly dropped in.
Anyway, we shouldn’t get sidetracked on that. I shouldn’t have even brought it back up.
Sorry, I’m not clear on which question you’re referring to. The issue of cunt (or rude words in general) was covered pretty well by Ed Zotti’s post, I think.
It’s really two names for the same idea. If you had to define them separately I’d say personal insults means name calling and personal attacks are abuse that doesn’t necessarily include the all-time favorites like “fuck you” or “you piece of shit.” In this case I wouldn’t say those words apply. If I were to give out warnings for either of those posts I would have said it was for being a jerk, not for insults.
That’s kinda the point, though, as the whole thing started because someone got upset about someone using a particular profane word in a place they didn’t deem necessary.
ETA: Sorry Soulfrost.
Throwing people’s words back at them is a time-honored tradition here. I think Cecil started it.
I like those, too. And I can accept that that was your explanation. I’m saying your timing wasn’t great. Or if nothing else - I realize smiley faces are kind of a comedy wimp-out but it probably would have cleared up your meaning.
Give me a fucking break.
