In this thread, we are carrying on a reasonably civilized debate about feminism.
In marches one of the SDMB’s resident morons, margin, and begins a Let’s Work Out our Personal Grudges Against An Unfeeling World by Shitting on Whoever is Handy shtick.
She even admits this is what she is doing -
But this is not the subject of my Pitting. The sky is blue, water is wet, the number pi is irrational and so is margin.
My Pitting is about this:
When Malacandra responds by asking:
And now we get to the part that needs Pitting, or perhaps explanation:
Each line of the above contains a factual error.
[ul][li]The observation was not “general”; it was addressed specifically to two posters, both named. This specificity of the reference was reinforced by the last line in the first paragraph referring only to “a couple of posters”.[]You said specifically that those two posters had not addressed the issues. []You said that both the posters had hurled invective. []You claimed that it was not an Official Warning. Then what was the part about the [ /Moderator Mode ] supposed to mean?[/ul][/li]I would request that you consider that [list=A][li]It is not necessarily true that both parties in a dispute are at fault equally[]If you are issuing a general warning, that you address it generally and not specifically[*]It might be better to be as clear when rescinding a warning as you are when issuing one.[/list][/li]
Regards,
Shodan
This always flashes me back to early childhood when my little brother would attack me like a rabid weasel, and I’d try to defend myself and get told “Both of you, knock it off. And you, you’re older-- you should know better!”
It’s cool. I wouldn’t like to have to moderate someone who can in all seriousness say things like
I mean, a random stranger in another country, who even in his own country has neither voted for a political candidate nor participated in a referendum on the awarding of combat honours to women, is in some way responsible for some septic broad not getting a tin star to pin on?
Granted I can’t imagine too many circumstances in which I’d be pleased to see my name and mrgn’s mentioned in the same sentence, I’m not especially peeved at tomndebb.
Each line of the above list contains either a factual error or an incorrect interpretation (which could, indeed, be my fault).
[ul][li]My “general” observation was the final line, separated by white space from the original text. I agree that that could have been more clearly expressed.[/li][li]I made no claim regarding whether the posters had addressed the issues, only noting in a conjoined sentence that addressing the issues was a better choice than personal remarks.[/li][li]I said that I was not about to move the thread simply because a couple of posters were hurling invective. I included both posters because at the point where margin had displayed hostility but not yet crossed the line, Malacandra first noted that it was not yet in the Pit but that there was still time for it to be moved.[/li][li]An Official Warning gets noted in one’s Permanent Life Record that one has been reprimanded for inappropriate behavior. There are occasions where I step in to ask everyone to cool down before a situation escalates to the point of requiring a reprimand and I do not, on those occasions, want any confusion whether I am posting as a poster or moderator. [/ul]The point of my post was to ensure that the situation did not get worse. It is entirely possible that I was too hasty and that, indeed, the hostility would have continued simmering and not erupted into a rules violation had I left it alone. I do not have an alternative universe time achine to review what would have happened had I stayed out of it. (And, yes, I am aware that one poster stated the intent to withdraw from the thread. If I had a nickel for every such declaration that was followed by another post, I would be enjoying a leisurely trip to Tahiti and moderating from the beach by satellite link.)[/li]
The process works something like this:
I scan as many threads as I can looking for good order and harmony.
As I pass through, I often notice sarcasm and other less than uplifting language that are the natural displays of people in disagreement. As long as those comments do not cross over the (admittedly fuzzy) rules that are being enforced in Great Debates, I tend to pass on by.
If I see a flagrant violation of the rules, I will admonish the poster with a direct statement that they are not to repeat the behavior.
If I see a disagreement edging toward a point where it appears that a general fight might break out, I will often suggest that the posters cool off.
In this case, I saw two posters each make a comment that the thread might be headed to the Pit and each make a direct comment on the manner of the other’s posting style and I stepped in to let them know that it would not be the thread that would be sent to the Pit.
I then made a separate statement that it would be well for (everyone) to spend less attention on each other’s person and more attention to the arguments. On re-reading my post, I will agree that I did not make it sufficiently clear that my final statement was a general one as opposed to being directed only to the two posters who had caught my eye by directly commenting on each other’s style.
When I actually rescind a warning (after I have actually issued a warning) I do make that clear.
So I think I need a little clarification: is MENTIONING the Pit outside the Pit going to create a problem? This is the second Mod (the first being Coldfire) reacting to (what seemed to me) a mild polite invocation of the Pit in order to suggest that things were getting uncomfortably and unnecessarily heated. If I may exaggerate what happened for illustrative purposes:
Margin goes bonkers in GD, cussing and spitting all over the place, and **Malacandra ** politely opines that the conversation seems to be headed Pit-ward and that’s regrettable, so BOTH of them get warned, Margin for inappropriate behavior and Malacandra for saying the “P” word?
IMO, not that this means anything and not that I’m applying for Junior Mod status, it would have been appropriate to warn Margin by name, if any naming were necessary, rather than include Malacandra. I prolly would have opted for a general warning, or general lamentation or best of all, a general call for civility.
No one was warned. Both made a point of criticizing the other’s style. Both opined in that context that the thread would be moved to the Pit. Both were told that the thread was not going to be moved.
No one was reprimanded. No one was ordered to stop any specific behavior.
I admit that my final statement should have been addressed more clearly to all the thread participants so that my intent was better understood. I apologize for that.
Yes, TVeblen. Goodness me, I wouldn’t want to confuse a poster who can’t be arsed to read the whole durn thread and form a reasonable guess as to whose username I’m - under suitable provocation - lampooning. (I’m surprised it was Guinastasia, though, who’s normally pretty astute.)
Is everyone who indulges in this silly habit going to get warned the same? Bank a nickel for each occurence, and methinks tomndebb’s Tahiti trip will soon be paid for.
Just to reiterate: I am not unhappy with tomndebb’s handling of this.
