I believe the rule is that I may not respond directly to your post, but must instead open a new thread. If the rule has changed, I apologize.
To clear the record, my remarks were directed toward DudleyGarret, and his dismissal of Giraffe’s helpful comment. I have nothing but the highest respect and regard for Giraffe. When I said he never means any harm, I *meant *that he never means any harm. There have been many occasions when he has extended kindness to me even while others were very unkind.
And I certainly made no reference to SmashTheState, and have no idea what you even mean by that. Nor have I done anything to deserve the school marmish snark that I received from you. I don’t think you should allow whatever random assumptions you make play into your decisions, especially when you sign off as a moderator.
You’ve made it look like I’ve attacked Giraffe, and that he needs your defense — neither of which, frankly, is true.
My feelings were not hurt; my intention was attacked. And I cannot sign my post with a bold “moderating” tag or whatever it was. I think the onus to “lighten up”, as you had put it, rests with you.
Lib–For what it’s worth, I, as a moderator, read your comment the same way that twickster did, thinking it to have something to do with Giraffe’s response in the StS’s thread.
Just shows you how reading typed words can be misleading many times.
Well, all right then. But can you explain how it related in any way to SmashTheState? I mean, that’s the same (unanswered) question I asked twickster in the PM. SmashTheState was suspended pending review of legal stuff. I saw an Ed thread with the title that he had been banned. I didn’t even read it because I don’t even care. I’m not getting how my defense of Giraffe somehow translated to something Giraffe might have said in Ed’s thread. (Which, again, I did not bother to read.) But I will read it now to see if I can figure out what the heck y’all are talking about.
Well, I guess I can sort of see how you might have related the two, but the people who actually DID light into Giraffe, with snark and all, got not even a comment.
Whatever. No matter. My apologies to Giraffe, twickster, samclem, and anyone else offended.
Well, while I’ve gone and opened this thread and everything, let me state for the record my opinion of Giraffe. I’ve already said many times that he’s the best Pit mod the board has ever had. (No offense intended to any other Pit mods.) But what many people might not know is the kindness that he showed to me when I left Omebo and posted a weasley apology. I was blasted by everyone EXCEPT Giraffe. He actually welcomed me. I set up a blog on his site, which I enjoyed for a couple of days until I read some of the “tags” on my thread. These were remarks people could leave anonymously — an unfortunate feature, in my opinion. Some of the remarks were cruel beyond all reason. Giraffe told me that he personally deleted the ones (like “worthless human being”) that he thought in his own mind were over the top.
So make no mistake about it. I respect the hell out of Giraffe. There aren’t many like him out there.
I read it as sarcastic too, Liberal, although it’s now obvious you had no such intent. Cynical souls that we tend to be on this board, I guess if there’s the slightest ambiguity in a statement we’ll go with the snarky sense!
Yeah, I understand. But gah … think about it. Y’all had to go to some obscure thread about Nobody being banned in order to pull out a very slightly sarcastic interpretation. But much sharper snark than that is used almost everywhere. It’s used a lot in GQ, for example. Even Giraffe uses it sometimes. (He was snarky in the mystery thread.) I guess I saw it as a double-barrel attack: how dare you mess with Giraffe, and don’t be snarky either — delivered with the usual mod snark.
But as we say in the South, ain’t nothin’ but a thang.
