In ATMB, bitching and moaning so endlessly about the moderators and board moderation that I couldn’t care less if they had a valid argument (for a change): SfG, prr, and Garfield
Most likely to hijack a Dio post to precipitate a Dio show: guin…, and one other whose handle eludes me at the moment
Most likely to appear when discussing the NY Giants (who don’t get their usual uppercase, bolding, and blue after last Sunday’s performance): Hal Briston, What Exit, and Ellis Dee
It’s not always a bad thing.
Others may have longer lists, but I don’t tend to remember names.
I’m sorry if you find it obnoxious. It’s just the way I write. I don’t intend to condescend; merely emphasize phrases that I feel are important (to avoid TL;DR) or could otherwise be confusing or ambiguous to read.
It isn’t the essential hinge, is my point. I’m bringing it up to offer people any excuse at all to justify using “the usual suspects” or any other dismissive phrase. Not one person has been able to offer a meaning of “the usual suspects” that isn’t a personal insult (“these people are whiners/trolls”) or threadshitting (“this topic is stupid/pointless”).
I ask again the questions that no mod has answered: What do you think it means, if not the personal insult and/or threadshitting examples I’ve given above?
Here’s my problem: I’ve explained, in detail, why I feel it’s a personal insult. The reponse has been, as I’ve said, the Monty Python argument sketch: “No it isn’t.” There’s been ***no one ***addressing the actual, valid points I’ve raised, which if it *isn’t *a personal insult should be very, *very *easy to do.
Can we *also *please drop this bullshit about the “general board populace” disagreeing with me? I’ve already given you evidence that many people ***agreed ***with me. Again, I invite you to scroll back up to my reply to **Shodan **with the spoilered quotes and see a slew of posts that agree this is a problem. The only way that anyone could possibly have the impression that I’m the only person who thinks that this should be considered against board rules (in the way it’s used that I’m objecting to) is if they have a bunch of people on ignore or aren’t reading the thread.
“The usual susupects” is not dismissive of the argument–it’s dismissive of the person. It’s a personal attack. It’s not saying, “*Your argument *is crap,” it’s saying “*You *are crap.” And that has *always *been the distinction for what is and isn’t acceptable here.
“Personal attack” means, to me, an attack against a *person *rather than against an argument. So, for example, if I were to say “All of the mods here are rapist scumbags,” that would presumably be against the rules, right, even though it’s against a group? How about, “Everybody in this thread who disagrees with me is a retard?” (Standard disclaimer: I do not think this is the case; I’m pointing out that fluid’s argument isn’t valid by taking it to its logical conclusion.)
I’m not asking for moderation against things that are dismissive or unhelpful. I am asking for moderation of existing rules: against attacking a poster instead of their argument (“you’re a whiner/troll”) and against threadshitting (“this topic is stupid/pointless and so is anyone who wants to discuss it”). Coming into a thread to do nothing but eyeroll about “the usual suspects” fits *both *of these criteria.
Thanks for reading the OP and skipping the rest of the thread. I’ve clarified over and over that I’m specifically asking for moderators to enforce the rules as to personal insults and threadshitting, *not *that I believe we should instaban anyone who so much as says the words “usual suspects.”
Why are we still talking about this? It’s irrelevant to this discussion. (I’ve since realized that your reply was to a side discussion that IIRC **Giraffe **started, which isn’t germane to the actual topic here). This is not a thread about me wanting to call mods morons or something like that–it’s a thread about wanting the mods to enforce the rules about personal insults and threadshitting.
Exactly. As I’ve said before and apparently need to repeat: “the usual suspects” has a negative connotation. When someone is using it positively, they are using it in an ironic way.
Yes, because he is using it ironically. He considers it an amusing turn of phrase becuse he doesn’t actually think poorly of the people he’s using it against. In the usage where I’m objecting to it here, it’s meant in an entirely negative, unflattering, insulting, and threadshitting way.
And I’m saying that if those people exist, they should be named and examples should be given. Otherwise we’re back to, “There are posters who stalk other posters and rape them in their sleep, and they’re the people in this thread who disagree with me.”
And I’ve already conceded that the OP was poorly phrased. I don’t have a problem with the phrase itself as with how it’s used by certain people in certain context, along with similar attitudes. My problem is with personal insults and threadshitting, not with a couple of words. All I want is for the mods to recognize and act against personal insults and threadshitting, and I’m attempting to draw their attention to this particular form of it.
See, and now I can provide evidence that you’re wrong that I do nothing but complain about the mods in ATMB. Some example threads…
I could give an airborne rodents buttocks for those links. Those posts didn’t get me to say internally, “Gee, what poster made all these helpful suggestions?” (assuming they were helpful - my religious memory seems to recall a suggestion that I didn’t care for that was dismissed with a ‘you don’t like it, don’t use it’ when it was just being pointed out the suggestion was not universally liked and no, I’m not looking it up). The endless bitching and moaning made me look and say, “Who is this PITA?” And then I noticed a pattern that when I looked at who was the PITA, 3 names came up repeatedly. Not just once or twice, which I would easily forget, but repeatedly.
So those three names are the usual suspects. (P.S. The names on my Giants list aren’t the only Giants fans, just the ones I’ve come to remember off of the top of my head).
Every time I see the phrase ( GAH!:p) “threadshitting”, it makes me think someone’s looking at the toilet paper after they pinch a loaf and wipe.:p:p:p
I’d be happy to answer that question if you’d like, but please be aware I am speaking for myself and not for the entire staff of the SDMB.
To me, the phrase, “the usual suspects,” is a funny toss-away line from Casablanca. Who’s coming to the party this weekend? The usual suspects. Who missed today’s staff meeting? The usual suspects. Who contributed to this week’s Mac vs. Windows discussion? The usual suspects. Who’s bitching and moaning about moderators in ATMB this time? The usual suspects.
It’s no more insult or threadshitting than “Hi, Opal,” “I can has cheezburger,” or “1920’s-style death rays.”
Why are we still talking about this? Well, it’s pretty straightforward. You directly addressed me in a post, so I responded to you.
I directly addressed you in a post that did nothing but be confused as to why you were talking about it in this thread and clarify that we can’t Pit mods, since you seemed to be confused about that. That’s all. I didn’t make an argument for or against being able to Pit them (I’m on the record as being ambivalent about it).
Oh, for cryin’ out loud. Instead of looking only at the sentence you quoted, read my whole damned post. You were griping that no mod would answer your question, so I answered it, specifically saying that I am speaking only for myself. And your response is to complain that my interpretation of the phrase is different from someone else’s? No, I didn’t miss bucketybuck’s post. The phrase just happens to mean something different to me. If you didn’t want to know that, why did you ask?
Here’s what I said, since you obviously weren’t paying attention the first time.
That’s what you would mean when *you *use it. I’m talking about what other people mean when they use it in the way I’m finding offensive. So if you seem to think they’re making a *Casablanca *reference, and I can show clear evidence that they’re not, can you appreciate why I’m frustrated when your response is, “Well, it means this to me”?
ETA: Imagine, to use an extreme example, we had somebody wandering around the board calling everybody “nigger.” Would it become acceptable if somebody popped into a thread complaining about it to say, “Well, my other Black friends and I call each other ‘nigga’ all the time!” The problem isn’t how the expression *could *be used (i.e., it’s not the expression per se), it’s the *specific *way it’s being used in these contexts.
Really, I can’t help but feel that a bunch of people are reading the OP, saying, “It’s stupid to outlaw a phrase!!!” and then skipping straight to the end without reading any of the intervening posts where I clarify that it’s not the specific phrase taht I think as the problem so much as certain uses of it where it’s used to insult and/or threadshit, i.e., where the intended meaning is “You (and other people like you) are a whiner/troll” and “this topic is stupid/pointless.”
That’s even worse. Sometimes “Usual Suspects” is ok. Sometimes it is not. And the deciding factor is your whim. Yeah. Not enough hookers and blow on the planet to get me to attempt to moderate that situation. No sane person would. Completely unworkable. And no matter how hard you try, this molehill ain’t never gonna be a mountain. Let it go already. The mods have ruled. You lost. Game over.
Thanks for posting just to tell everyone that you didn’t read anything. Maybe you can do that for every thread you haven’t read. I’m sure the mods would love it.
No, the deciding factor is the clear intentions of the person making the statement. I bet you we could put any use of “the usual suspects” up to a vote and have the vast majority of people come to exactly the same conclusion as to whether it was meant positively (e.g., to a group of coworkers) or negatively (e.g., to the people in a thread who disagree with you).
And you’ve made your opinion of the merits of this thread very clear. So what does that make you that you’re still here telling me my topic is stupid and pointless?
It makes me correct. There is no circumstance barring divine intervention or you buying the Dope outright that will get you what you want. Every mod/admin that has spoken on this issue says no rule change is happening. You are not a mod/admin. You do not make rules here. At this point, you are accomplishing nothing but making yourself look bad. You should stop that.
I’ve read most of the thread, and skimmed the parts I didn’t actually read. You’re beating a dead horse, and it was my way of using your own words to point it out. Perhaps you are taking this too seriously.
So you are asking the mods to subjectively moderate the situations to suit your interpretation?
Except the statement was not that you do nothing but post complaints in ATMB. The complaint was that certain posters such as yourself bitch and moan endlessly about the moderators and board moderation. This thread being a case in point.
You’re welcome to your opinion. Personally, I’m going to continue discussing this as long as there are people engaging me. Then we can all have our own opinions about who looks bad; I happen to think it’s the mods and admins who are brushing me off, ignoring my arguments, and outright misrepresenting my position and the support for it, though you obviously disagree.
If you think I’m wasting my time, the proper response is to walk away from the thread.
I’ve asked *again and again *for another interpretation of examples of “the usual suspects” that I have claimed to be offensive. *Nobody’s *given one, and the person I quoted in the OP confirmed my interpretation. The closest I’ve gotten is a general observation that *sometimes *people use it in a friendly fashion with their friends or colleagues.
GAH!:p) “threadshitting”, it makes me think someone’s looking at the toilet paper after they pinch a loaf and wipe.:p:p:p