Give that man a cee-gar. On both points.
If by interpreting, you mean ***mis-*interpreting, then, yeah. Else . . . no.
Sorry for the confusion, all. And the too large gap between the initial post and this clarfication. Life, ya know.
Maybe he had you confused with the Sean Penn character in I Am Sam. I know I make that mistake every time I read one of your posts.
I suppose it would have been better to phrase it “offering his interpretation of Unclebeers post.” I didn’t think you were implying anything trollish with your post, though I will say that I can see where that could be read into it.
No, ElvisL1ves was the one making the not-particularly-veiled insinuation that it was trolling. I was going to report it to a mod, but it seems that it was acceptable, since Ike has declined to admonish him.
Interesting, to say the least.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m not going to warn or note him either, and I have no particular history with Scylla except for political disagreement. Two reasons, that intertwine: I can see how the comment could be interpreted differently, and I only step out of my forum for egregious offenses.
Those of you who are convinced that it is an offense would be better served to report the post so that the Pit Mods may decide. I cannot say how any of them would feel about it, but if you don’t report it, chances are they won’t know about it. In general, one should never feel shy about reporting a post, or assume that all moderators think alike.
I know. I’m trying to live up to pedantic.
Stop being a fucking tease with the beer, ok? It’s cruel.
That’s no evidence whatsoever. If you were biased and unreasonable it is doubtful you would recognize it (you know, kinda by definition.)
If you are reasonable and impartial you must allow for the possibility that you are neither and merely deluding yourself. Therefore you cannot trust your feelings on this, but require an outside source.
I’ll accept that. However, impartiality is no guarranty of equality.
I think that the complicity in the rule violation and the negligence is more serious than the actual crime.
From context, I interpret the “T-word” to mean “trolling.” You say I have picked the “most offensive” interpretation. What alternate interpretation fits the context?It’s clear that Elvis understood what he was doing and is aware of the rule. Otherwise he would not have chosen to veil his insinuation by saying “T-word.”
What alternat interpretation do you offer to “trolling” for the “T-word?”
Your conclusion does not follow. If Hentor and yourself disagree with the statement 2+2=4, that does not mean that the answer is unclear or subject to interpretation. It simply means you didn’t get it.
If it were me, I probably would have warned Elvis without having to be told. If I had missed it, and somebody was being an ass about pointing it out, I would still warn him. Somebody else being an ass would have no bearing on whether or not a rule of the board had been violated, and would not effect my responsibility to uphold the rules. The fact that Ike is willing to ignore open violations of board policy when it serves his whims, demonstrates willful negligence. He has proven himself incompetant.
Funny you should mention it. That’s exactly what I did the last time Ike pulled this shit. Another moderator did come in, and did rule while Ike stood by.
Seeing that that’s already occured, it seemed meaningless to repeat it. Highlighting Ike’s lack of impartiality and willful negligence seemed a better choice this time around, if for nothing else than variety’s sake.
I would like to be civil about this, but I just can’t manage it. If you think it is against the rules, just fucking report it. You can’t play persecuted when you won’t even make an effort to do something about it. Fucking pathetic is what that is. I almost think you don’t really want a mod to warn Elvis because then you wouldn’t have anything to whine about.
“The mods must be biased against me because they won’t do something about the rule violation that I refuse to tell them about.” :rolleyes:
Did you notice that Ike has posted in this thread, and addressed the insinuation I mentioned? Do you really think that he is unaware of it?
I mean, come on now.
Regards,
Shodan
But of course the same thing could apply to you leaving us exactly where we are right now: nowhere.
There is still the question of whether or not a crime has been commited.
You’re interpreting the wrong part. “T-Word” is not the issue here. Anyone with half a marble flipping in their brainpan knows what “t-word” means. The alternate interpretation would be that Elvis was not implying that you were a troll. He was interpreting Unclebeers post to read that Unclebeer was calling you a troll.
Bad analogy. Your interpretation of Elvis’ post is far from a clear cut fact. This isn’t whether or not the sky is blue. It’s closer to arguing which particular shade of blue the sky is today.
If you really believe that Ike is so negligent, build a case against him and take it to an admin. You would build a better case by getting other mods involved instead of pissing and moaning in a pit thread.
And on preview. Shodan, I did see Ike’s reply to Elvis’ post. The sticking point is how one interprets Elvis’ post. It’s entirely possible that Ike had a different view of the post than you or Scylla. I know it’s less fun because it implies no negligence on the part of Ike, but it is just as valid of an interpretation as yours and Scyllas. Maybe things would have turned out differently had someone reported the post instead of simply being a dick about it.
And just as a clarification in case it was needed. My contention is not that one interpretation or the other is correct. My view is that both are equally valid.
Y’know, I generally don’t credit Elvis with much intelligence. The idea that he actually thought was accusing me of trolling and was trying to clarify is simply patently ridiculous.
First, I don’t know how you can reasonably get that from Unclebeer’s post. Secondly, if you do get that, than why is it necessary to disguise “trolling” as the “T-word.” You would not be making the accusation. You only need to disguise the word if you are attempting to veil an insinuation that you are making. The fact that he did is proof that he was making the insinuation.
No. It really is just blue. There is really no case to be made that Unclebeer was accusing me of trolling except as an after the fact attempt to muddy the waters by granular Elvis apologists.
I don’t need a case. Ike is doing a fine job of digging his own grave.
I respect that you disagree, but I think there is really only one legitimate interpretation. The alternate interpretation depends upon Unclebeer accusing me of trolling and Elvis interpreting Unclebeer’s post as such a sincere accusation.
Unclebeer and I are usually on the same side politically, and there has never been any animosity and Elvis has dealt with both of us on innumberable occasions, so I don’t think the case can be made that he legitimately thought this.
If you choose to make that very bad case then why would Elvis need to disquise “trolling” as the “T-word?” Why would he add the rolleyes?
As has already been made clear to you, oh thick headed one, the interpretation is not of what “t-word” means, but whether it was an accusation of you or a question about UncleBeer’s comment.
Now, you’ve already stated that “chummed” was used as a double entendre, non? Ah, oui!
And one of those entendres was “to throw bloody scraps in the water to generate a feeding frenzy [not a quote attributed to any specific person].” Most people would agree that this type of behavior is trolling. Running out of real estate, you’ve hung your hat on a debate about intent versus effect. Surely one would understand that divining intent from effect in a message board posting is not quite as clear as 2+2=4. And since you’ve already acknowledged that one specific entendre of “chummed” was as above, it is hardly reasonable to expect that ElvisL1ves be punished for commenting on that meaning (again, which you already acknowledged), particularly since he made no comment as to intent or effect.
(Furthermore, the other entendre, “friended” really just makes no fucking sense.)
You’ve got no case which is why your defenders are Shodan and xtisme. Stellar cast, indeed.
I also have to wonder, since you didn’t report this formally, if all of this is some sort of attempt to gain attention.
Tangent: You’ve got the leather seats, right? The one thing, IMHO, they really screwed up was the cloth seating with the printing all over it. Cheeeeezzy!
Ya know, I had a big long post all written up in reply to you Syclla but I scrapped it. I still feel that both views are valid interpretations, but I think that yours fits better.
I hadn’t considered this part fully. I’m still not convinced that Ike has failed in his job or is in any way biased against you. Just that, as in my case, he hasn’t thought about it fully.
I reported the post last night and would like a mods opinion either way. Scylla, if’n we ever run into each other, beers on me.
If you reported it last night, then I think you have the mods opinion of it.
It means a lot to hear you say that.
That’s what I thought, but an explanation would be nice if a mod happened to pass by the area. 
Somehow I figured the beer post would mean more.
And don’t go getting too misty. I still think you are being a major jackass by not reporting it and making public demands of a moderator. I’d have a lot more respect for you if you’d made an attempt before crying mod bias.
I’ve sincerely found that assuming you will understand and not deny the readily apparent is not a safe bet.
Take this for example: Is it your argument then that Elvis sincerely thought Unclebeer was accusing me of trolling, and was therefore sincerely asking for a clarification?
Is that the positon you are arguing?
Yes.
No. That was not one of the entendres (as you seem to recognize since you can’t attribute that quote that to me as even a paraphrase of my pov.) The other “Entendre,” as I mentioned is the effect my actions had on the Lefties. I even gave you an example, something like “His sincere efforts chummed the knee jerk lefty scum into an irrational feeding frenzy.”
I find your persistent mischaracterizations tiresome. I also consider them a compliment. Mischaracterizing my arguments in order to respond to them suggests you find them intimidating and are unable to respond to them meaningfully.
When you mischaracterize another, you are conceding defeat.
I think they would. Unfortunately, this hypothetical and the point of view it represents cannot be attributed to either me or Unclebeer. So, the point is moot. It is nice of you to acknowledge the strawman though as you construct it.
It’s not exactly brain surgery in this case. In fact it really is inherently obvious.
No. As you kindly pointed out, your mischaracterization of my argument is simply a straw man.
Ok. In the spirit of goodwill, I’m going to really really try to help you understand it. Since it is irrelevant to the substance of what we are discussing, you have nothing to lose by understanding it:
Somebody calls me “Friend, Scylla.” They’re not really actually saying they are my friend. They are being formal and ironic. Unclebeer clearly finds this self-conscious patronizing convention annoying and comments about it as “hivespeak.”
Somebody else asks why is this on page 2. Unclebeer says “Scylla chummed the lefties.” You understand that “Chum” is a synonym for friend. Unclebeer is actually restating the ironic “Friend, Scylla” statement to recharacterize the lefties as sharks in a mindless feeding frenzy (which he is arguing by pun is a more accurate view of what was meant by “Friend, Scylla.”)
Reflect on it as a pun, and you’ll likely get it. No offense on this part. No ulterior motives.
Yes, I did. I consider myself really lucky to have found this leftover with only 500 miles on it, and get such a bargain. I know the v8 is wasteful and what do I need with 300 horses, and I’ll surely wish that I had the v6 (which has what 240 hp? As if that’s not enough to kick you in the ass,) when I’m at the pumb, but to hear that big v8 rumble through the dual pipes is pretty cool.
I can see that. Like I said, I took a similar tack to what you are saying last time (I called Ike out, while simultaneously reporting it) so I thought it was time for something different. Ike has made it personal with me. I don’t know what engendered his ill will in the first place, and I took him at his word when he claimed no offense. When he did it again, I offered him a venue in private to discuss it. Apparently, he didn’t wish to. That’s fine. I consider his initial recanting to be proven disingenuous by his subsequent attack. He’s made it personal, so I make a point of making a big deal of it when he comes after me.
I think it’s innapropriate for a moderator to be making personal attacks, habitually. We are paying customers. By doing so, he opens himself up to claims of favoritism and vendetta in his moderator capacity, and he sacrifices his ability to do his job and have his judgement accepted. Ike take it even further by actually being partisan and willfully negligent in his duties.
As long as he comes after me and is negligent at the same time, I’ll make a big deal about.
No - 210. I figured there would be more times that I would wish that I had gotten the V8, because that is a cool feeling indeed. Sadly, there are no occasions in the commute to downtown Pittsburgh that you are not at risk to be passed by an 8 year old girl on a scooter. I hardly use the 210 that I do have. I also take solace in the fact that I’ll feel better to hand over the reins to my son in 5 years if there are 90 fewer reins to give him.
Then I can get my retro Camaro with all the kinks worked out.
As to the rest - I haven’t mischaracterized anything. I figure that ElvisL1ves had pretty much the same reaction that I did. Which was to read UncleBeer as joking about you chumming the waters. Which pretty much connotes trolling, whatever other entendres you try to Elmer’s glue on top of it. Which leads to the question “Can you call it chumming and have it be okay for some reason?”
Again, I don’t give two shits about trolling, accusations of trolling, yada yada. It seems to me that we have more problems with hints at trolling and warnings about trolling and types like you whining about being called names than we fucking would without some strange rule about not saying the t-word. But that’s just me. What does bother me is your clear attempt to snivel your way either into a warning to another poster or at least some pathetic attempt at attention. Given that you chose to whine for several pages about it instead of reporting it in the first place, getting attention about it seems to be your real motivation.
Which, man to man, is a pretty puss move. Maybe you do need the V8.