http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13084403#post13084403
adhay. show me [a coherent OP] …
Show me the money!
Show you what? Post number 4, where you taunted him?
You know your OP was nonsense, as so many of your OPs are, and your reponses to the posters were nonsense, as so many of your responses are, and you knew he was going to close it.
Why the mods don’t warn you every single time you pull this is beyond me.
Taunt tom by addressing the OP to him?
tom?
So my question is, tom, why do you get to mod as a poster?
Because no one would volunteer to be a mod if it meant they couldn’t post anymore.
In post #4 of the thread you linked to in your OP here, you taunted him. Sheesh.
Would you care to defend why your thread should not have been closed? I’m seeing no reason to disagree with the moderator action there.
Thanks for sharing. tom?
I merely suggest that, when modding, mods confine themselves to rule interpretation and when posting, as good example to all, confine their opinions to the intent of the OP.
Are you complaining that he didn’t put “moderating”, or something else to indicate that he was posting as a moderator and not a poster, in the post where he said he was closing the thread?
If so, I don’t really see the issue. It should have been 100% clear from the context that he was moderating.
Come to think of it, I think that’s his gripe. Note the way he brackets [moderating] in the thread title.
Given the location of this thread, I think I’ll keep my opinions about this thread to myself.
Here’s tom as poster. (post #42)
(bolding mine)
Nice, eh?
And here’s tom as semi-mod. (post #43)
Click!. Got the pic?
If he closed the thread, he was acting as a mod, because non-mods can’t close threads. QED.
If?
QED, indeed.
[m][/m] tags are available for serious modding.
tom?
Actually, it was. It showed a great deal of self-restraint on his part.
While I am a strong proponent of mods always using some kind of “mod hat on” sign, that post didn’t really leave a lot of room for ambiguity. Were you somehow confused as to whether he was posting as a moderator? If so, why?
Restraint?
Let me recommend
Not you, tom.
Using the moderator tags is not required. They are usually used to avoid ambiguity. If closing or moving a thread, they are unnecessary, since only mods can do so. When moving a thread, and sometimes when closing one, I usually don’t bother with the tags. You are confusing a frequent practice with a requirement.
I like this one. (post #3)
tom?
Since it seemed to bother you so much, I have added the postscript “[ /Moderating ]” to the post in which I announced that I was closing the thread.
OTOH, since it is obviouis that an announcement that a thread is being closed can only originate from a staff member, such postscripts are redundant and I will rarely add such superfluity in the future. On the third hand, if you are going to waste bandwidth and my time with similar complaints in the future, I am going to have to seriously consider your typical nonsensical OP to be trolling, after which neither of us will have to deal with the issue.
Thanks for stopping in.
Talk about bandwith. Typical poster.
What about [Moderating]?
Adhay, you kept posting “tom?” everytime any other than tomndebb posted a response to you.
If tomndebb was the only person you wanted to discuss this issue with, why did you open a thread rather than send him an email?