And not every Doper watched that whiner.
The link was a poor excuse, at best.
I’n 68, and while I am aware that Seinfeld was a popular TV show I have never seen a single episode. At most a clip or two.
Remember that no matter how universally familiar you may think a particular reference is, there are going to be a certain percentage who do not recognize it.
The percentage this time being between 90% and 95%.
It was a direct response to your moderation. I thought it was fairly obvious that he was explaining his action.
So, the warning was for posting more breast jokes, after being noted? It was for ignoring moderator instructions?
I think you misunderstood the nature of the message. He wasn’t ignoring instructions, he was explaining his action.
@Chronos, was this the reason for your warning, or any part of it? Only you didn’t mention it.
@What_Exit, examples of that happening, please? Specifically examples of people getting an actual warning.
A single post responding to a moderator has usually been tolerated. A moderator may sometimes respond by withdrawing their note, problem solved. If it isn’t resolved in a single post, then the poster is instructed to “take it to ATMB.”
I can’t recall anyone getting a warning just for a single reply.
Okay, I’ll ask. @Chronos, were you annoyed or angry at DG’s post?
A single link to a video without comment? Usually not.
No, it was a bare link. I don’t click on 95+% of video links. And I believe a large percentage of the board is similar, especially when posted bare. Even a single sentence added would have substantially increased the value.
So you admit you were disputing the moderation, I’m sorry, you called it an explanation, but that’s still a dispute. So from my POV, that’s a clear violation, right after a stern note, and a board-wide no-no (not worth of a warning in it’s own right normally) of a bare link.
So the way I see it, you posted a tasteless joke (note), disputed moderation (warning), AND violated board good conduct (normally another note). Three violations, one warning. You did pretty well.
What about choice #3?
To me the joke didn’t work, and therefore was neither funny nor relevant. Jayne Mansfield’s breasts had nothing to do with her death - she died in a car accident. Pardon me for being literal about a joke, but in a thread about people dying, I think a certain amount of accuracy matters.
Besides, there’s already an acceptably on-point tasteless joke about her death (a National Lampoon cartoon) that would have worked even better.
Right. Just because it was on Seinfeld doesnt make it even a rumor. It was a tasteless bad joke then, and decades have not improved it.
You dont fight, argue or explain in thread. You PM the mod or start a thread here. You can apologize,
Correct. Not to mention it was totally false.
Exactly. An “oops, sorry, that was a line from Seinfeld” might have passed.
I am that generation, and I saw most of them, but that line didnt stick to my memory- even after being reminded. “Not that there’s anything wrong with that”, sure.
If there’s two things you’re guilty of, it is assuming that media references are more universally familiar than they are, and assuming that jokes about women’s breasts are always welcome. If there’s three things you’re guilty of, it is assuming that media references are more universally familiar than they are, assuming that jokes about women’s breasts are always welcome, and thinking that quoting or paraphrasing sitcoms is remotely funny.
How many posters watch Turner Broadcasting System’s Official YouTube Channel™ - I don’t.
Not that I’m weighing in, and I certainly don’t have anything against DG. But I’ve been here long enough to know that was going to raise an eyebrow.
And the…
Bit kind of sinched it.
I’m a big Seinfeld fan. There is a well known reference from that episode. It wasn’t about Jayne Mansfield. It’s the quote at the end of your clip. You didn’t quote anything from the episode. You vaguely paraphrased an unfamous line from an episode that contains one of the most famous lines of the series. Your post made no sense as a Seinfeld reference. Your “explanation” made no sense and made it worse.
This is one that the poster in question has refused, from day 1, to accept or abide by. And three posts up, he slaps us with it again.
LHoD said
“If there’s two things you’re guilty of, it is assuming that media references are more universally familiar than they are, and assuming that jokes about women’s breasts are always welcome. If there’s three things you’re guilty of, it is assuming that media references are more universally familiar than they are, assuming that jokes about women’s breasts are always welcome, and thinking that quoting or paraphrasing sitcoms is remotely funny.”
I replied with a reference to
“I don’t need anything except this. And that’s it and that’s the only thing I need, is this. I don’t need this or this. Just this ashtray. And this paddle game, the ashtray and the paddle game and that’s all I need. And this remote control. The ashtray, the paddle game, and the remote control, and that’s all I need. And these matches. The ashtray, and these matches, and the remote control and the paddle ball. And this lamp. The ashtray, this paddle game and the remote control and the lamp and that’s all I need. And that’s all I need too. I don’t need one other thing, not one – I need this. The paddle game, and the chair, and the remote control, and the matches, for sure. And this. And that’s all I need. The ashtray, the remote control, the paddle game, this magazine and the chair.”
A photo is usually okay.
My understanding is that bare links to videos are discouraged if people are expected to watch the whole video and dissect it to get the poster’s point. It’s the same reason why you aren’t supposed to start an OP that is just a link to, say, an article. You have to give some kind of explanation and not make others do the work. Make the point yourself.
Just speaking personally, for how I’ve seen the way videos are received, a short video is almost always okay because it’s not hard to figure out. And a long video is okay if it’s easy to understand in context. Let’s say that there’s a thread about funny SNL sketches, and someone posts a clip from a SNL sketch. No explanation needed there; we’re talking about sketches, here is one people can watch and enjoy, potentially comment on.
But a video that you need to watch through and try to find a reference, that’s questionable at best.
I imagine it’s the same reason why the board discourages posting in a foreign language without a translation. If people read a thread and then have to look up a translation themselves to figure out what the heck you’re talking about, that’s a real pain in the ass and nobody likes that.
You “replied” with a picture from a movie and, frankly, the first thing that honestly came to mind was the title of that movie.
I don’t even know what movie that picture is from.