Lib, would you prefer to be called “Daddy”, or “Junior Moderator”?
And when did you become Lynn’s spokesperson?
Sam
I prefer to be called Lib. And I’m not speaking for her, I’m speaking for me. It’s MY opinion, as a member not a mod, that y’all are being mean to her. And I’m expressing my opinion. Did I need to clear it through you?
You’re being an egomaniacal, sanctimonious asshole again-as you have been for the last 2 weeks or so. Myself and many others have called you to the carpet umpteen times for it already, and you’ve ignored it every single time. Hell, this is the first time you haven’t played the silent treatment game with me.
Let Lynn speak for herself. I feel for her medical concerns, and I know what a toothache can feel like, but if she’s our mod here, and she’s making decisions arbitrarily and some would say capriciously, we have a right to hash this out-it’s a Pay-to-use forum now.
Sam
A-fucking men. I swear to Og, I think they should somehow take away the ability to reinstate bannees for awhile, and then somehow piss Lynn off so she goes through the boards angrily banning assholes left and right for a couple of days. Like a forest fire that comes once every 50 years, I think it would do much to clear out the deadwood and ensure the long-term health of the ecosystem.
Who authorized you to call me on the carpet? You must read with your fucking feet, 'cause I just told you I’m speaking for my fucking self. But you seem to think you’re speaking for the whole fucking world. Jackass.
Furt! Good to see you posting outside GQ these days. 
No you don’t. You have the privilege to hash it out. And Lib has the privilege to retort, and/or ask people to have some decency and patience.
If that denotes being a “Junior Mod”… well, Gawd, I think that just says more about your own inflated sense of entitlement rather than Lib’s behavior.
<lynn this has nothing to do with you, hope your tooth feels better real soon, I got no complaints about you, infact I think you have been extremely tolerant in my case>
Good God Lib, first you start a thread all hot and bothered about how Striesand, who has demonstrated her support for liberal causes (not freeky tax cheating libertarian causes mind you) and specific support in the fight to end racism, and scream that Ohh Ohh She is sooo RACIST. Then in the end when its clear you were being stupid you admit that maybe you just possibly missinterpreted the act. That maybe a long time supporter of equal rights and affirmative action was not after displaying a racial insult.
Now you’re all offended by questions addressed to LYNN BODONI. Questions which it would be a stretch to interpret as insulting anyway. What the heck is the deal? Trying to win some brownie points? I get the feeling LYNN BODONI tooth ache or not is capable of an addequate defense. Lay off the missplaced indignation, it is getting old, and I have only been around for a short while(despite high post number).
I am willing to bet $5 that LYNN BODONI has not been offended by any of the posts in this thread, except maybe yours.
Since I am apparently getting the Lib silent treatment as well the following is for any oldtimers:
OT-Where the hell did Monkey With A Gun go, thats a guy I would like to hear from occasionally.
You don’t have the right to any such thing. Here’s what your $5 buys you:
You have a right to the things above, subject to the user agreement. All other rights, including the right to discuss rules and recieve answers from Mods to rule questions, are strictly imaginary.
I didn’t know I needed permission to call you out. Is that one of the benefits of Junior Modding? :rolleyes:
Speak for yourself all you want, but don’t talk down to a group of us who are asking for some kind of explanation in the proper forum to do so.
Spoofe- I’m not sure where you get the idea that there’s any entitlement issues here. I’m simply fucking tired of Lib shitting all over everybody else’s bitches in this forum. He seems to think that his complaints are all valid(Barba a Racist? Psshaw), but then in a situation like this, our complaints aren’t worthy of pit time.
And I do think making this a pay site entitles us to a little more “rights”-wise than when this was a free entity. That’s why I was pretty sure this idea would go over like a fart in church(as my boss would say).
I may be wrong about that, but it’s something I’ve thought was a problem for a few years.
Sam
I am uncomfortable disagreeing with Lynn, but this instance is representative of something I’ve noticed a few times, and I feel I must bring it up.
Using a hate term sarcasticly may be unwise, as it’s open to misinterpretation. However, the facts that: (1) it should be clear that no insult is intended towards Jewish people (in this case); (2) the (admittedly small) sample of people posting here don’t consider it jerkish; and (3) similar uses haven’t been reported or noticed (for which I don’t blame anyone); mean that I think it’s certainly not obviously jerkish behaviour.
Mostly I think relying on the “don’t be a jerk” rule is a good idea: it’s fairly obvious what is and isn’t, and I trust moderator judgement. Trying to codify rules would open up more of can of worms.
But sometimes, it’s really not obvious. While not necessary I think it would be reasonable to either (1) make a list of the dozen or so non-obvious rules, such as is done with the ‘fewer game threads please’ suggestions or (2) have a standard ‘softened’ warning - eg. “You couldn’t really have known, but we have decided [something] is a bad idea. Now you do, please don’t, or next time you will be being a jerk.”
You may be right, and that may be a reason why I don’t decide to subscribe. I’m not sure $5 is a proper price to pay to have my post count back…
you can have mine…don’t leave
If I leave the boards, I have to study.
If I study, I pass my Comp exams.
If I pass, I graduate and have to get a job.
Hence, I’m posting all over the place this week.
Enjoying this surreal moment of cameraderie amidst the vitriol…
So you might get a warning you didn’t deserve. As long as you don’t keep on doing it. Life will go on, and that warning will be forgotten; it’s not like you have 2 strikes in perpetuity after that. (I got a warning on 9/12/01; I should hope thats been forgotten by now). Moreover, the thing that everyone seems to forget is that even if you’re banned, it isn’t necessarily the end of the world; you email, apologize, and you can be back in. So it’s not like someone is going to just suddenly find themselves banned and have no recourse. The leeway for vague cases is built into the system.
Is the part in bold really true? Cause if it is I might actually get some sleep tonight.
BTW Lib, LYNN BODONI has mad an appearance to BANN somebody since your post. But failed to say anything about all the alleged insults you are so indignant about. I would think that means LYNN BODONI does not feel insulted, so you can relax. I know you are not talking to me, but I just wanted to let you know…
PS LYNN BODONI, just a suggestion, do with it what you like, but it would really reduce the chance of innocent people haveing heart attacks if you start off a bannishment with the name of the offender. I still have not quite recovered from opening the e-mail that said “thats enough from you…” I had to wait till the hamsters were done slacking to find out you were not talking about me.
If it’s untrue or a new policy, why is Collounsbury the “late” Collounsbury? He didn’t leave the boards willingly, ya know. He was banned. Twice.
Just because you don’t see every warning made doesn’t mean they aren’t happening. One of the mods/admins said in an ATMB thread recently (I can’t remember which one) that a lot of the warnings are done privately by e-mail.
Well, not everyone that gets banned can smooth things over with an “I’m sorry e-mail”, however, the Admins have been known to give people a second chance. For example: the aforementioned Collounsbury. He was banned and later reinstated, but didn’t adhere to board guidelines (again) and got banned (again). It’s highly unlikely that he’d be given a third chance.
Lib, you are reading waaaaay too much into this.
I’m not really feeling up to defending my actions right now. However:
Ukulele Ike, the only current moderator in CS, is away from his computer right now. So the CS reports were not read, more than likely. I have placed a warning in the thread, now that I’m aware of it.
There is, indeed, a Warnings thread in the Moderation forum, where the staff documents warnings issued. It was about 10 or 11 pages long, before I decided to split it alphabetically. Now there’s almost a dozen Warning threads in there, and we can find previous warnings much easier.
Ever wonder what happens to the spam threads we get every now and then? They get moved to the Moderation forum, in case we need to reference them later. In one case, I moved a spam thread from the Moderation forum to ATMB, because I had traced the spam to a computer lab at a university. I made contact with the guy running that lab, and he wanted to see the thread and some other info, which I gave him.
Warnings are not expunged with time. However, if someone has 2 warnings, one from 4 years ago, and one from yesterday, that person will be treated much more leniently than someone who had a warning two days ago and then another one today. We don’t have a set number of warnings that we will give before banning someone.
I think that I should really stop now.
Lynn
For the Straight Dope
I think there’s a perfectly good reason to disregard intent wrt hate speech, which is that some people will use hate speech in a “joking” manner though their every intent in using it is to do harm. They just use the “joke” element to conceal it. So in addition to having to sort the hate speech from the joke speech, we have to sort the “disguised” humor from real humor. If you allow such uses you will forever be defending why you allowed this use and not that one. Far simpler and fairer to just ban the words, if they mean that much to you.