# Tuba Diva, why did you lock this thread? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 2, 2010, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250 "2010-11-02T21:13:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**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:** [November 9, 2010, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/101 "2010-11-09T19:21:11Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > I feel so bad for you, being compelled to read **SFG** ’s yammering. If only there were some remedy within your capacity to free you from this awful burden you bear… There’s something about mirrors and burning irony in there somewhere. Anybody? ---
**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:** [November 9, 2010, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/102 "2010-11-09T19:24:06Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Deal with corruption? This is how I deal with it–I point it out when it’s particularly egregious sometimes. Yeah, isn’t it horrible how they make threads like this disappear all the time and ban the people who propagate them? The corruption here just _frightens_ me sometimes! ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/103 "2010-11-09T19:35:05Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Deal with corruption? This is how I deal with it–I point it out when it’s particularly egregious sometimes. Corruption? I thought these threads tended to be about mod mistakes, did I miss the bit where the mods are taking bribes and disposing of bodies? What on earth are you on about? ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/104 "2010-11-09T20:05:35Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Posters tell other posters\* all the time \*that they are posting in the wrong forum, without admonishment. I reject your assertion that only mods can do so legitimately, and ask for a cite. Only a mod can \*order \*you to move a discussion to another forum. Fellow members may \*suggest \*a venue that may be more appropriate, but it’s generally considered a better practice to just report the thread if you think it should be moved. > [@bucketybuck](#): > > What on earth are you on about? That certain moderators have at times allowed their personal preferences, outside of the actual rules of the board, to influence their moderation and/or have given the impression of doing so. ---
**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:** [November 9, 2010, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/105 "2010-11-09T21:57:52Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Yeah, isn’t it horrible how they make threads like this disappear all the time and ban the people who propagate them? The corruption here just _frightens_ me sometimes! Oh, come on, why don’t you just go straight to Godwinizing what I’m saying, and save us all some time? You know you want to. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/106 "2010-11-09T22:29:17Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > Personally, I think that when there are two “right” decisions, but a person choses one of them for the invalid reasons, that makes it a “wrong” decision. And your proof that the decision was made for the wrong reasons is… oh yeah, you disagree with the action taken. The action that you object to was within the list of acceptable actions. Therefore, it doesn’t matter the motivation, it was acceptable. > [@](#): > > But I very demonstrably \*didn’t \*“just” dismiss them–I read them and considered them. You simply didn’t like the conclusion I came to: that your examples were not entirely relevant to the situation at hand, to wit, an OP that was requesting discussion on the very topic that was considered a “hijack.” Demonstrating why it is useless for me to bother trying to find examples that you will accept. Because I found examples that I accept as parallels. And that’s the point - I accept the original action, and I think these are the same thing. Ergo, why should I bother finding more examples? You’re just going to reject them for some reason that to me is trivial and irrelevant to the point, and then use that to justify your assertion that there are no similar incidents, so that somehow proves that the action taken was, therefore, inappropriate. > [@](#): > > Now that is absolutely, 100%, demonstrably inaccurate,\* not to mention offensive. There was no intent to be offensive. Let me quote **twickster** ’s prior response: > [@twickster](#): > > I was mostly wondering if it was possible for you to consider the possibility that I was acting in good faith. Apparently it isn’t. Thanks for your input. This is how your arguments are being perceived. If your position is not coming across clearly, I am sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/107 "2010-11-09T22:42:17Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Oh, come on, why don’t you just go straight to Godwinizing what I’m saying, and save us all some time? You know you want to. I think you done Godwinized yer own self. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/108 "2010-11-09T22:47:39Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > And your proof that the decision was made for the wrong reasons is… oh yeah, you disagree with the action taken. The action that you object to was within the list of acceptable actions. Therefore, it doesn’t matter the motivation, it was acceptable. And again, you’re putting words in my mouth. The problem is, here, 100%, that \*\*twickster \*\*telling people to move the AA discussion because it was a hijack and \*\*twickster \*\*telling people to move the AA discussion because she doesn’t like the fact that people are saying negative things about an organization that’s been very important to her and she hopes that people will just shut up about it look, to an outside observer, exactly identical. I am not saying whether it’s A or B–I’m saying the fact that a third part \*could \*percieve it to be B means that the decision should have been made by someone who cannot be accused of being biased. Again, since apparently you missed it the first time: a judge recusing themself \*isn’t \*saying they’re a bad, corrupt person who’s incapable of making a fair decision, simply that it’s necessary to avoid any appearance of such a bias so that the decision can’t be called into question. > [@](#): > > Demonstrating why it is useless for me to bother trying to find examples that you will accept. Because I found examples that I accept as parallels. And that’s the point - I accept the original action, and I think these are the same thing. Ergo, why should I bother finding more examples? You’re just going to reject them for some reason that to me is trivial and irrelevant to the point, and then use that to justify your assertion that there are no similar incidents, so that somehow proves that the action taken was, therefore, inappropriate. Except that I’ve \*always \*\*explicitly \*mentioned the OP’s request to specifically discuss AA, which you ignored because it was convenient for you. > [@](#): > > There was no intent to be offensive. Let me quote **twickster** ’s prior response: Yes, and you’ll note that my second quote to you was a reply to her. You’re both completely twisting my words because you’ve already decided that I’m wrong, so anything I have to say must of course fit your interpretation. So even when I _explicitly state more than once_ that I don’t think \*\*twickster \*\*made a conscious decision to shut down the AA debate, you both claim that of course that must be exactly what I’m saying. Because apparently you know what I mean better than I do, even when I’ve said it straight out. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/109 "2010-11-09T23:19:21Z")
**Shot From Guns** said: > [@](#): > > Again, since apparently you missed it the first time: a judge recusing themself _isn’t_ saying they’re a bad, corrupt person who’s incapable of making a fair decision, simply that it’s necessary to avoid any appearance of such a bias so that the decision can’t be called into question. I saw that post. I understand that point. I accept that and agree with it. My only concern was with regards to how an explicit policy might or might not work here. > [@](#): > > Except that I’ve _always explicitly_ mentioned the OP’s request to specifically discuss AA, which you ignored because it was convenient for you. I am not and have never ignored that point. I have stated that my interpretation is that the request from the OP to discuss AA was a minor component of a larger topic, and that the details of the direction that part of the discussion took did not merit being in the original thread. I have repeatedly stated that you and I see this differently. I have tried to show examples of similar threads where the component that was moderated was a part, but not the whole and not the main thrust, of the original topic and did not belong in that forum. I have tried to show parallel examples of threads that were closed because part of the discussion spawed by the OP was no longer relevant to the post and forum in which that discussion was occuring. To me those are exactly parallel cases. You say the examples I’ve given don’t fit precisely because to you, the AA component was integral to the thread. Once again, we are stuck on the fact that you disagree on the nature of the AA component of the specific example. ---
**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:** [November 10, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/110 "2010-11-10T00:14:20Z")
> [@Eutychus](#): > > I think you done Godwinized yer own self. Does that make me the kid that keeps repeating, “Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!”? ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/111 "2010-11-10T03:38:40Z")
Is it just me, or does it seem like a handful of posters have lately turned into a group of professional whiners? Does it have anything to do with last week’s elections? ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/112 "2010-11-10T15:32:11Z")
I probably should have said “you _and I_ disagree…” in that last sentence. The way it is currently phrased comes off wrong. ---
**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:** [November 10, 2010, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/113 "2010-11-10T16:55:21Z")
> [@bucketybuck](#): > > Corruption? I thought these threads tended to be about mod mistakes, did I miss the bit where the mods are taking bribes and disposing of bodies? > > What on earth are you on about? And specifically, for those who still care, it’s corrupt for Mods to act in their official capacities in threads (as **SFG** notes) to advance arguments they made (and to suppress others they disagree with) while claiming that they’re innocently performing their duties fairly and equitably. I’d still blast them, of course, if they’d fess up and admit, “Hey, I just don’t care for this fucken poster or his fucken position, or the horse he rode in on, and I view this as an opportunity to bust his balls, ha ha ha” but I wouldn’t be blasting them for corruption. What I mean by “corruption” is “abusing one’s position of authority for selfish purposes while claiming heatedly that nothing of the sort is going on.” Scoring debating points is NOT one of the perks of modding, as I see it. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/114 "2010-11-10T17:19:26Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > I have repeatedly stated that you and I see this differently. I have tried to show examples of similar threads where the component that was moderated was a part, but not the whole and not the main thrust, of the original topic and did not belong in that forum. But that’s just the problem–you and I see it differently, but you’re not bringing in examples that include the part that you obviously understand that \*I see \*as being important. So why are you surprised when I reject the examples that don’t include that aspect as though I’m simply dismissing them out of hand? > [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > Is it just me, or does it seem like a handful of posters have lately turned into a group of professional whiners? Does it have anything to do with last week’s elections? If you’d like to call me a whiner, you may care to take it to the Pit and do it to my face, where I can adequately respond, instead of making “blanket” statements that are clearly directed at me. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/115 "2010-11-10T22:41:51Z")
**Shot From Guns** said: > [@](#): > > But that’s just the problem–you and I see it differently, but you’re not bringing in examples that include the part that you obviously understand that _I see_ as being important. So why are you surprised when I reject the examples that don’t include that aspect as though I’m simply dismissing them out of hand? Okay, I doubt I’ll be able to find a situation where the mods closed a thread rather than moving it because the _main point_ of the thread was posted in the wrong forum. If I really dig, I could conceivably turn up a thread that the main point was in the wrong forum _and_ posters were hijacking in various ways (most probably by turning into a Pit thread) that they closed rather than moved because it was too convoluted to go in any one forum. Basically you are asking for examples that fit your understanding of the situation, but they probably don’t exist, because if the mods agreed with you, then they would have done something different. So kudos to you that they didn’t do what they should have\* for the situation as you interpret it, but you’ve still got that confounding detail that _they_ interpreted the situation differently, so acted differently. (And I say “they” because by now it has been reviewed by more than one mod, even if only one additional one has actually posted on the topic.) I don’t see that this is going anywhere. I feel we’re stuck at a couple of points: 1. The specific event is over. It has been reviewed by the staff, and concurred with. The thread is closed, and the moderation has been bought off on. If someone took the appearance of moderator bias, the appeal has been seen and rejected, any moderator bias was irrelevant/insignificant because the action taken was deemed appropriate. 2. The staff do not seem interested in creating a rule that moderators are _required_ to recuse themselves from moderating a thread in which they demonstrate a strong opinion, even if that mod violates the rules they are supposed to enforce. ## Continuing to discuss this does not appear to be changing anything. \*Should have, could have, would have… something like that. ---
**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:** [November 10, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/116 "2010-11-10T22:50:25Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Continuing to discuss this does not appear to be changing anything. This seems like handwaving to me. I see virtues in a higher standard of mod recusal, and would like to continue discussing it and recommending it. If no one wants to argue with my position, fine. Then don’t participate in that (this?) thread. You’ll have thousands for company. But there’s a term for posting in a thread just to assert “I don’t see the point of this thread.” And it’s not a complimentary term. I’m just saying. If you were a Mod, you could emphasize your point by locking the thread, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/117 "2010-11-10T23:30:13Z")
NEW PIT THREAD!!! > **[Resolved: Shot From Guns is a whiner. Here's a pit thread to argue the...](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=585130)** > > Throughout this thread, Tuba Diva, why did you lock this thread?, Shot From Guns has been claiming that the rabble has been accusing her of being a whiner. The rabble in question have been saying that she is, in fact, a whiner. With this post, she... ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/118 "2010-11-10T23:45:26Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > That certain moderators have at times allowed their personal preferences, outside of the actual rules of the board, to influence their moderation and/or have given the impression of doing so. Ah, well, not the phrasing that would have sprung to mind, but understandable enough. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2010, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/119 "2010-11-11T00:27:11Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > If you’d like to call me a whiner, you may care to take it to the Pit and do it to my face, where I can adequately respond, instead of making “blanket” statements that are clearly directed at me. No, settle down, I’m thinking of several. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2010, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250/120 "2010-11-11T13:25:03Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > If you’d like to call me a whiner, you may care to take it to the Pit and do it to my face, where I can adequately respond, instead of making “blanket” statements that are clearly directed at me. Well, **SfG** , I started a pit thread so they could do that, but it seems the consensus is that you _ **are not** _ a whiner, and most people think you’re OK. I guess I wouldn’t worry about the one or two, if I were you. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tuba-diva-why-did-you-lock-this-thread/559250.md?page=7)