# Tomndebb, you lighten the fuck up **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 13, 2012, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347 "2012-08-13T04:21:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/21 "2012-08-13T22:50:47Z")
I don’t see it. **Oakminster** didn’t violate any rules. He didn’t disrupt the thread. He did raise an objection to the assumptions of the thread. Contrary to your assertion, his comment is reasonably polite (as opposed to the title of this thread). His point may or may not be valid to the OP, but that is not grounds for moderator intervention. Your comment would have been perfectly fine as a regular poster. As a mod note, it makes no sense. You could have made an instruction to not derail the thread without including the statement “lighten up” or commenting on the validity of his interpretation of the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/22 "2012-08-13T22:52:02Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Oakminster’s post was the first response to the OP. Qin’s was the second. Despite Oak’s claim of a “polite” statement of “fact,” it was not all that polite and it was irrelevant to the point made in the OP. How was my post not polite? I did not insult the guy, I merely stated that I object to the way he phrased it, and I explained why. > [@](#): > > My post was to mitigate against the possibilty that the thread would be derailed before it could even get off the ground. > > No one was Warned. No one was accused of breaking any rules. My reply was a fair comment on what he posted. Your interpretation of the OP’s intent is not the only one possible, nor is it the most likely from the plain meaning of the words used. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/23 "2012-08-13T22:55:00Z")
On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being “the unbearable lightness of being” and 10 being “total uptiightitudeness”, I’d say **Oakminster’s** post was maybe a 3. Posts in GD routinely break the 5 barrier, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post that low on the meter getting a mod note. “I object to…” wasn’t necessary, but it was hardly a launching pad for thread derailment. It’s SOP to correct factual errors made in an OP, and _sloppy_ errors often get a little snark in the side. The OP made a sloppy error. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/24 "2012-08-13T22:56:28Z")
The jackboots are strong in this one. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/25 "2012-08-13T23:27:42Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > If you want my opinion, **tomndebb** (and I don’t see why you would), your comments would have been more appropriate without the Mod Hat on. This is true of 27.3% of **Tom** ’s Mod posts. Over 50% are completely unnecessary (50.8%), and the remaining 21.9% are perfectly appropriate. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/26 "2012-08-14T02:11:35Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > My reply was a fair comment on what he posted. Your interpretation of the OP’s intent is not the only one possible, nor is it the most likely from the plain meaning of the words used. Here’s the deal oak-a-rino…you’ve just admitted what pretty much anyone with a pulse can recognize, that the OP could be interpreted in more than one way. (Note: this is not an insult, just a positive confirmation that you do have a pulse). You chose to write a tunnel-vision post, focusing with laser-like guidance on the one interpretation that any rational collection of even loosely coupled cells would immediately realize seemed suspiciously trivial, given that, for someone to “get a pass” there would almost have to be some sort of requirement, maybe, perhaps, could it be…yes, a draft. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/27 "2012-08-14T14:36:41Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > You chose to write a tunnel-vision post, focusing with laser-like guidance on the one interpretation that any rational collection of even loosely coupled cells would immediately realize seemed suspiciously trivial, given that, for someone to “get a pass” there would almost have to be some sort of requirement, maybe, perhaps, could it be…yes, a draft. Which is completely irrelevant to the situation. It’s totally acceptable (if mockable) for a poster to harp on a suspiciously trivial interpretation of a remark and point out the obvious. It is rather bizarre for a moderator to make an official note over it. An instruction “let’s not hijack this thread before it even starts” might have been appropriate. The remark to **Qin** was completely valid. The remark “lighten up” and the correction of the interpretation of the remark don’t really belong in moderating tags. Tom, I say this with respect. I’ve read a number of the complaint threads against you over the years. In the vast majority, I support you. Claims that you are biased in moderation have not held up for me. In _this particular instance_, I do not see how your remark to **Oakminster** belongs in mod tags. It does not relate to board behavior or even approaching a rule violation. I grant you the first two posts out the door didn’t really address the question per se, and for that matter, I’m not sure why that question is in Great Debates in the first place, and not in GQ. I can see why you might have felt an instruction was in order to try to keep the thread from getting tanked before it started. But the particular remark you made to **Oakminster** just doesn’t read like an issue for moderation. It reads like a response from a poster to a poster about the content of a post. And I really don’t see how his comment is inappropriate for that thread. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/28 "2012-08-14T14:52:03Z")
I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response was the OP fishing for when he worded the title of this thread? How was he expecting a moderator of this message board to react? How would _most_ message board moderators react to such a calm and reasoned request for clarification? ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/29 "2012-08-14T14:56:25Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response was the OP fishing for when he worded the title of this thread? How was he expecting a moderator of this message board to react? How would _most_ message board moderators react to such a calm and reasoned request for clarification? I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response is this poster fishing for when he worded this post? How was he expecting anyone else to react? How would _most_ people react to such an unnecessary and prodding request to get angrier? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/30 "2012-08-14T15:09:41Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response is this poster fishing for when he worded this post? How was he expecting anyone else to react? How would _most_ people react to such an unnecessary and prodding request to get angrier? “Fishing” for an answer from the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/31 "2012-08-14T15:13:31Z")
Oh no, a moderator isn’t being treated like a precious flower! I must respond - but is there time to don \*all \*of my white knight gear? Too late - I must come to their defense! ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/32 "2012-08-14T15:16:19Z")
This wouldn’t have been a problem if Tom had waited long enough for the OP to respond. The whole thing is making a mountain out of a speck of dust. It’s beginning to remind me of the voter ID laws trying to avert crimes that don’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/33 "2012-08-14T15:17:26Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response was the OP fishing for when he worded the title of this thread? How was he expecting a moderator of this message board to react? How would _most_ message board moderators react to such a calm and reasoned request for clarification? I don’t know. What do you think? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/34 "2012-08-14T15:19:19Z")
> [@Drunky\_Smurf](#): > > I don’t know. What do you think? I think I’d rather find out from the source than speculate. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/35 "2012-08-14T15:23:32Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Which is completely irrelevant to the situation. It’s totally acceptable (if mockable) for a poster to harp on a suspiciously trivial interpretation of a remark and point out the obvious. It is rather bizarre for a moderator to make an official note over it. You are correct. And I agree. As I said before: 1. **Oak’s** “fact” is only a “fact” when applied to a clearly incorrect interpretation of the OP 2. I don’t think moderation was required ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/36 "2012-08-14T15:53:54Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > 1. **Oak’s** “fact” is only a “fact” when applied to a clearly incorrect interpretation of the OP I disagree. “Giving them a pass … nowadays” implies special treatment is currently given to Orthodox Jews. This isn’t true, and it is fair to point that out, and even object to it, if the inaccuracy bothers you. Whether or not we re-institute a draft is irrelevant, because “nowadays” we don’t have one. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/37 "2012-08-14T16:59:36Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’ve got to ask: Exactly what type of response was the OP fishing for when he worded the title of this thread? How was he expecting a moderator of this message board to react? How would _most_ message board moderators react to such a calm and reasoned request for clarification? You seem to be implying that there’s some meaningful chance that Tom would have acknowledged his error if only Oakminster would have asked nicely. Based on what I’ve seen of him in similar situations, I disagree. The answer to your questions is that it was a public protest, and not necessarily aimed at Tom specifically. (Much like most other threads of this sort.) ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/38 "2012-08-14T17:18:06Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I disagree. “Giving them a pass … nowadays” implies special treatment is currently given to Orthodox Jews. This isn’t true, and it is fair to point that out, and even object to it, if the inaccuracy bothers you. > > Whether or not we re-institute a draft is irrelevant, because “nowadays” we don’t have one. It depends on the definition of “nowadays”. When I read the OP I thought to myself, “well obviously the OP is referring to a broader time frame than what is in effect today because that interpretation is trivially incorrect, therefore they are including the last time a draft was instituted, which I believe was vietnam. Coupled with the explicit mention of the draft in WWII, this seems logical and correct”. The term “nowadays” can vary depending on the context, here’s an example: “Nowadays we don’t sacrifice virgins to the gods” ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/39 "2012-08-14T18:31:48Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > It depends on the definition of “nowadays”. Unless you’re talking geologic time, nowadays isn’t going to include something that went away 40 years ago. > [@](#): > > When I read the OP I thought to myself, “well obviously the OP is referring to a broader time frame than what is in effect today because that interpretation is trivially incorrect, therefore they are including the last time a draft was instituted, which I believe was vietnam. Coupled with the explicit mention of the draft in WWII, this seems logical and correct”. I think you’re being overly generous with your interpretation. Even if you’re not, this interpretation implies that Orthodox Jews got a pass on the Vietnam Draft. If that’s the statement he intended, it’s an even more volatile claim, and had better be right, which I don’t think it is. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347/40 "2012-08-14T19:32:05Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I think I’d rather find out from the source than speculate. Then why not directly ask him instead of using the weird third person accusatory questions? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-you-lighten-the-fuck-up/631347.md?page=3)