The first time that she pulled a similar stunt, it was said to her politely and firmly and clearly, but with no (or minimal) “shock and awe.” The second time that she ditto, it was said to her more firmly and more forcibly, but with no rancor.
When you get to the third (fourth? fifth? sixth? … I’ve lost count) time for the same sort of shenanigans, you do tend to lose the ability to state the situation calmly.
I think a suspension is fair. It’s nice to see other disciplinary options besides outright banning, which IMO is too severe in lots of cases. It sounds to me like she deserved it, if my understanding of what she did is correct. How we bring new people here is highly important, and if it’s done in the context of a feud it’s not likely to lead to anywhere good.
It shouldn’t be considered; you’re right. I never said that it should, and if my post implied that, then I chose my words poorly. It’s just that the SDMB means more to vanilla – that it’s a much larger part of her life – than for most of us, and thus a permanent banning would impact her far more than for most Dopers. Thus, she should take any disciplinary action – and the advice offered in this thread – very, very, very seriously.
Uhhh … I’m definitely not a godlike icon, nor have I ever claimed or implied as such. With a little over 3,000 posts, most containing at least one or two typos, I just tend to blend into the crowd most of the time. What did I say to deserve that response?
It took me about five reads through the original Pitting just to figure out what the hell Vanilla was complaining about.
Honestly, what the heck’s this all about? Talk about fighting a war over a worthless cause.
::whispers::
**ffinn ** was talking to **Lib ** then.
I think that award already went to Paul Verhoeven 
Legolamb wrote
I on the other hand hope Vanilla grows the decency to apologize to Tuba Diva and the rest of the board for the way she’s portrayed us to others, others that are supposedly important members of her social circle.
Also, I would hope that after a few spankings (such as this latest one), Vanilla would grow up a bit and stop using the people around her. She uses her ailing father who supports her completely and drives her everywhere. She uses the Elder and his wife in her church to drive her places when it pleases her, she uses the Pastor, and she uses her community by refusing to try to find a job. Now she’s used some bitter members of the SDMB community to beat down her real-life foes, when their only crime was to say “there are two sides to a story.”
However, as is her nature, I expect she won’t change a bit, especially when she sees support for her nonsense such as this thread.
Aren’t there some helpless children or old people you could go torment? You might enjoy kicking their crutches.
Va-(I’ve had my abortion but nobody else should)-nilla reaps what she sows- discord and discontent.
So, some folks don’t want to give her a free ride anymore and probably decided they don’t even like her enough to drag her to church with them anymore (just guessing here). Boo-f’ing hoo. But it’s not enough for her just to get dissed IRL, as usual, she wants to drag as many people as possible into it.
She seems like the kind of person that has to create chaos to feel normal. And she has the nerve to complain about others being judgemental. That’s a laugh.
And that justifies pejorative commentary about a member’s faith from an administrator? It’s one thing to judge her as a member and what she’s done as a member, but even her pastor doesn’t have the right to say to her “you’re a bad Christian.” It’s just not appropriate, instructive, constructive or anything more than a mean-spirited personal attack made for no purpose except to be hurtful, and Admins should be better than that. If TubaDiva was that angry, then she should’ve stopped, counted to ten, taken a deep breath and calmed down before posting.
If some of you are in touch with vanilla on a more personal and private basis, maybe you can help her to learn how to handle her anger and hurt feelings in assertive, appropriate ways rather than in the passive/aggressive approach she used in this case. Certainly the first method would be more in keeping with her Christian beliefs.
Maybe someone who is a braver soul than I can help her to see that what happened to her with the elder’s wife is often the result of being part of a fellowship that feels comfortable in pronouncing judgment on the behavior of other Christians. This time vanilla was on the receiving end and can see now how hurtful it can be.
The coming month will give her lots of time to practice other teachings that she values. I am going to miss her, but maybe it will work for her best interest.
As for you, TubaDiva, the Muses inspire me to write only “Take it on home, Baby: Oompah pah…oompah pah…yeah!” (They swear you will understand…)
Sorry, mate. If you’ll review my post, you’ll see that I was talking to Liberal in that last part.
From what I’ve read, you appear to be a good guy, a reasonable guy-definitely NOT a pompous windbag. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
I saw no pejorative commentary about vanilla’s faith. I saw an accurate observation in the context of a thread in which proper christian behaviour was the subject.
From the beginning she complained about being characterized as a “taker” rather than a “giver,” depending on a fellow parishener for taxi service for over a year. Objection: (paraphrased) “How would she know this about me? The only time she sees me is when I’m taking rides from her!” :rolleyes:
She then ignored the few circumspect responses there were in favour of the more comforting “They’re being bad Christians and you are totally blameless :hug: :hug:” responses, which she used as ammunition to attack.
After an increase in petty strife, Pastor Jeff stops by with some very sensible observations, getting thoroughly thumped by a bunch of shrill jerks who smelled blood in the water. Very ugly and embarrassing.
Here we have someone who pitted someone else for being a poor christian, got a lot of support (naturally) for this characterization from her friends, based on a very one-sided and still not-terribly-damning account, and took a course of action that really ought to be a source of shame to anyone who holds to christian principles.
This was an “attend to the beam in thine own” situation in red letters nine feet high.
There is nothing wrong with pointing that out – in fact it would be an unforgivable laxity not to call it to her attention.
Wherein lies the offense?
I just reread it, and I misread the context of the quote. My bad.
:smack:
Thanks for the advice.
Last time I heard, vanilla was an adult person with no disabilities other than her refusal to accept responsibilty for her own actions and words. And for her refusal to take constructive criticism (not mine, but all of the cc that both nice and not-so-nice people have tried to give her ever since I have been lurking here) and grow with it-into a better, more viable adult. In case you haven’t noticed, she has been given input into her behavior by other posters ad infinitum; and by the powers-that-be here several times, increasingly more sternly. She appears to have chosen to feel that she has nothing to improve. She has now been (I hope) disabused of that notion. Of course, if I am misinformed about her adultness, I’ll apologize forthwith. Not if she just has crutches, though. That wouldn’t excuse her in this instance. To MY mind, anyway.
If you call that tormenting innocent children or kicking elderly person’s crutches, then hey-I guess your opinion is just as valid as mine. Not to ME of course, but there are probably a bunch of people here who agree with you. You’re all entitled.
[sub]I just KNEW this “pay-to-post” thing was going to get me into trouble. As long as I was lurking, I never got het up about anything bad enough to register and post it. And I wouldn’t have done so THIS time, either. But there I was, all registered and everything. See what happens when you let the lurking rabble in?Perhaps, in MY case, they should be paying me NOT to post.[/sub]
I thought of something this morning and this kind of touches on it.
To clear up any confusion in the future, would the mods consider putting SUSPENDED under a poster’s name instead of BANNED if they know it’s only going to be 30 days? That would let us know to wait 30 days then ask the poster what happened rather than open a new thread everytime this happens.
Just a thought.
Some of us early on in the thread (myself included) were operating under the assumption that vanilla would have a good chance to return after suspension. As more information has come out (even without Lib’s top secret super duper special intelligence), that good chance seems less likely.
maybe not so top secret super duper special after all, for this may be the source?
talk about gossiping without any concrete information! good Og! whad have i turned into?!
I meant to include “regardless of what happens in this case”. Sorry for the omission. Just wondered for future cases.
Umm, look at the time stamp on the OP and Lib’s post about his having info. that he will keep secret.