# What constitutes an off-topic comment? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 19, 2013, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134 "2013-04-19T14:37:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/41 "2013-04-19T17:53:41Z")
So if I was either being a jerk or hijacking, why wasn’t I officially warned? Is it your contention that I violated one of those (old) rules? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/42 "2013-04-19T17:58:56Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > **kayaker** , don’t hijack the thread. Sorry. Wasn’t aware I was. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/43 "2013-04-19T17:59:26Z")
Heavy handed and unnecessary modding as far as I can tell. The comments were not at all off topic when the topic is outrageous sorority girl behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/44 "2013-04-19T18:06:13Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > **kayaker** , don’t hijack the thread. > Yes. Are you trying to argue that those statements contradict each other? They don’t. > > I’m not going to do a search through scores of mod notes to find one I believe you will find similar. If you can’t understand the general point, you will have to live with the uncertainty. Marley, this is disingenious. To tell kayaker to not bring up Cesario and his months of constantly inappropriate and unmodded sexual comments, and then to come back at Oakminster that you can’t think of any instances of inappropriate and unmodded sexual comments? You may not be making up any new rules, but you’re certainly trying to enforce the old ones in wildly creative new ways. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/45 "2013-04-19T18:17:05Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Marley, this is disingenious. To tell kayaker to not bring up Cesario and his months of constantly inappropriate and unmodded sexual comments, and then to come back at Oakminster that you can’t think of any instances of inappropriate and unmodded sexual comments? Since you’re apparently not even making a token effort to read the posts (I did not say I can’t think of an example, I said I wasn’t looking), I’m giving you a warning for ignoring mod instructions. Don’t post in this thread again. > [@Happy\_Lendervedder](#): > > So if I was either being a jerk or hijacking, why wasn’t I officially warned? Is it your contention that I violated one of those (old) rules? Because **Ellen Cherry** decided the comment deserved a note and not a warning. Is there a problem if she decided a reminder was in order and not an official slap on the wrist? > [@Sorority girl's warning letter to sisters goes viral - It's epic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorority-girls-warning-letter-to-sisters-goes-viral-its-epic/656104/22): > > In a thread where a woman’s vitriol (however entertaining) is the subject, I’m thinking overt sexual remarks are out of place. The words “fuck” and “suck” aren’t being used in regards to sex and it seems like these responses are being made because the thread deals with sororities: an all-female group. > > This isn’t a warning, just a reminder that everyone needs to be mindful of off-topic remarks, including those which have at their base a knee-jerk view of women as sex objects. > > Again: NOT a warning. A reminder. I’m not sure why you’re calling the rules on thread hijacks or being a jerk old rules; they’ve been around forever and we’ve always enforced them. I’m not arguing that you broke a different rule; I’m trying to explain where these comments actually did come off as jerkish and we don’t allow that. ---
**Author:** ![Orr\_G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ee59a6/32.png) [@Orr\_G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orr_G)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/46 "2013-04-19T18:17:24Z")
I can’t say I’m surprised, given the recent threads on this board. Of course one or more of the mods were bound to err in that direction sooner rather than later. I just hope that it will be seen by the mods as such, lest the issues that brought about those threads become trivialized as people tussle over rulings on this level. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/47 "2013-04-19T18:23:52Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m sure you are aware we have rules against being a jerk and hijacking threads. We do?! A rule against being a jerk, yes, I’ll grant. But you’ll recall that less than 48 hours ago you calmly, gently, hatlessly cautioned me against tiptoeing on eggs around implying criticism in the wrong forum of\*\* over eight years\*\* of consistent hijacking of virtually every thread on a given topic, leading me to conclude that the rule against hijacking has fallen into desuetude. Look, one of this board’s great strengths has been its policy of discretionay, common-sense application of the rules to individual circumstances – a policy that **TubaDiva** has been championing longer than our youngest members have been alive.. And having seen boards drive members away in droves by a np-exceptions-never-nohow application of Draconian rules to innocuous toes-across-the-line posts, I’ve been solidly and vocally appreciative of the job this staff has done. Lately, though, it seems like you as a staff have been getting, very slowly and gradually, more and more capricious in deciding what constitutes a rule violation, converting that strength into a weakness. Decisions seem to be made on whether a staff member (or possibly those available at the time, conferring by e-mail) find a given post distasteful or unduly fractious, not on any discernible-by-members standard, even applied with discretion and moderation according to common sense as in the past. And because I feel so strongly about how well the staff has done in making tough decision on an ongoing daily basis, it’s taken me a long time to get pissy-assed enough to speak up. To be fair, the trend I’m seeing is so long-range and gradual that I’m certain you all are not doing anything intentional; it’s probably been a slow change in perceptions over the years. Tp give you an example of what I’m saying in a third area besides the one in the OP and the one you and I butted heads on in the Pit, “All you staff members are either delusional or hungry for power or money.” That’s not an insult; it’s a parallel of a hyperbolic screed anyone discussing their own religious beliefs in GD, however relatively mellow or bizarre, can expect to receive, and reports of such posts get, at best, a “Consider the source” response. Such posts would have been slapped down as insulting in 1999-2000, although their conceptual content phrased in less accusatory language would have been acceptable (as it should be; I don’t think people’s beliefs should be, err, sacred cows. It’s the (laudable) trend to allow free expression resulting in laxity in applying the rules to such cases on the discretion thing, no doubt, and in a way that’s good. But in another it makes GD an uncivil, unpleasant place to post, and is the main reason, along with a bitter aftertaste of the **badchad** episode, why I seldom post in GD threads on religion these days. What I’m saying, I guess, is that you guys have taken the judiciousness that has made you one of the best, if not THE best, moderating staff on the Internet, and allowed it to evolve in a direction where you’re giving an impression of arbitrariness … and I’m sure you concur that that’s not good. Please take a good look at how things have been evolving over time, as a group, and see if there’s anything to my criticisms. I really feel it will be worth your time to do so. And thanks for doing a good job in the past, all of you Mods. and Admins. past and present, and please, please hear this not as an attack but as a wake-up call from someone who recognizes what you’re up against and respects how well you’ve done, considering, up until and even mostly during the last few years. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/48 "2013-04-19T18:31:41Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > We do?! A rule against being a jerk, yes, I’ll grant. But you’ll recall that less than 48 hours ago you calmly, gently, hatlessly cautioned me against tiptoeing on eggs around implying criticism in the wrong forum of\*\* over eight years\*\* of consistent hijacking of virtually every thread on a given topic, leading me to conclude that the rule against hijacking has fallen into desuetude. I have absolutely no clue why you would come to that conclusion. You posted a quasi-moderating criticism in the Pit and I said those belong in ATMB. That was the entire extent of what I said. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/49 "2013-04-19T18:52:55Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I have absolutely no clue why you would come to that conclusion. You posted a quasi-moderating criticism in the Pit and I said those belong in ATMB. That was the entire extent of what I said. Because my take-away from that exchange is that two posts relating to the OP’s topic in that thread, viz, **Magellan01** ’s consistent interjection hijacking virtually every thread on SSM his idee fixe of a system of one set of laws governing two institutions, i.e., civil unions and traditional marriage, and consistent refusal to grant any validity to the objections raised by dozens of others as to why his idea would not work, with the implication that staff seem disinclined to moderate the hijacking, is that the important point to you is not the breaking of the rule against hijacking but the brinking of the rule against criticizing staff in the Pit. Well, gaw-LEEE!, I cannot imagine how I could have possibly concluded that the important point to you was not the idea that somebody was getting away with hijacking any and all threads on a topic, but that somebody might dare break the vital and important rule against criticizing staff in the wrong forum! How could I have been so blind? ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/50 "2013-04-19T18:55:31Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m not sure why you’re calling the rules on thread hijacks or being a jerk old rules; I called them old rules because they’ve been around forever. As opposed to a new rule. I still don’t understand how my comment can be construed as being a hijack, or how I was being a jerk. Or even what to avoid in the future. Humor? Satire? Making a comment on someone’s over-the-top behavior? Making comments on finding someone off-board or someone’s off-board actions sexually appealing? Sex in general? If what I posted is considered a hijack, worthy of a mod “reminder,” then I pity the bland future of this board where posts _in MPSIMS_ have to fit within such a narrow parameter lest they be considered a rule violation. If I was being a jerk because I made an untoward comment about the actions of someone who doesn’t even post here (afaik), then what about anyone here that makes tasteless/negative/insulting/critical/lewd comments about _anyone else on the planet who made the news_ on any given day? If I was being a hijacking jerk because my comment was sexual in nature, I think the rules of the board are being arbitrarily and inconsistently applied here. If I was being a jerk because you think I was being sexist or misogynistic, then I have a bone to pick. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/51 "2013-04-19T19:00:27Z")
Could someone explain how the joke was off-topic, and/or in what way it had at its base a knee-jerk view of women as sex objects? I do not see that jokes are off-topic in a thread such as the one where the joke appeared, in MPSIMS. It would seem to me that a joke is generally on-topic in a forum which explicitly advertises itself as “Pointless”. Nor do I see how a joke in a thread about a foul-mouthed sorority girl making a bunch of unintentional double entendres has at its base any knee-jerk reactions about women being sex objects. As to this - > [@](#): > > Since you’re apparently not even making a token effort to read the posts (I did not say I can’t think of an example, I said I wasn’t looking), I’m giving you a warning for ignoring mod instructions. Don’t post in this thread again. You gave **Munch** no instructions for him to disobey - you merely said you weren’t going to try to demonstrate what you said. You do realize that was Munch’s first post to the thread, do you not? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/52 "2013-04-19T19:12:20Z")
Were there actually any posters reporting that comment? Because I really can’t see how it can be taken as offensive. ---
**Author:** ![Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/53 "2013-04-19T19:14:08Z")
This is obviously a reaction to the misogyny threads of late. I am 100% in favor of mods being stricter when sexist comments are aimed at women posters or when threads take on a sexist slant that create an atmosphere of misogyny. But I simply don’t think either is the case in this sorority girl email thread. I’d really like to hear the opinions of the women who posted a lot in the other threads. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/54 "2013-04-19T19:17:32Z")
> [@Ellen\_Cherry](#): > > I also referenced the misogyny thread, for the reason that its been the consensus (which I agree with) that comments of this sort, in aggregate, contribute to a minsogynst tone of the board. So, time to stop that kind of thing. > [@Marley23](#): > > We didn’t make any new rules. I’m having trouble reconciling these two statements. Ellen’s explicit reference to the misogyny thread seems to imply either a new rule or a new interpretation of existing rules. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/55 "2013-04-19T19:20:23Z")
On the one hand, there are certainly times that I’m unaware of why something would be offensive to a particular group, and I appreciate the education on the topic (Ms. “Hottentot Venus” springs to mind). On the other hand, when **colander** says it’s not offensive, I’m not sure how it is. On the third hand, a mild note, not a warning, in that direction doesn’t concern me that much. On the fourth hand, I’m not clear on how **Munch** managed to draw a warning: he was, in ATMB, discussing a mod decision, in a reasonably respectful voice, and that seems entirely appropriate to me. And on the fifth hand, I certainly appreciate that the mods are taking this issue more seriously than before, and if it has some missteps or disagreements along the way, it’s totally worth it; we’re in the process of figuring this out, and patience all around is worth having. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/56 "2013-04-19T19:20:39Z")
I can’t think of a time I’ve bothered to criticize the mods here - overall I think they commendably do a shit job - but when I read **Ellen Cherry** ’s note in the thread linked in the OP my first thought was that she was kidding. It’s so over-the-top. I appreciate the attention to misogyny that has lead to the discussions happening in this forum, and I’ll be glad to see overt sexism cracked down on. But I agree with the majority here; the jokes in that sorority thread were neither mean-spirited nor degrading to women. Not nearly as degrading as the rant in the OP. And the point of the thread was to _mock_ at those sterotypes, which is what the posts that received the warning were doing. ETA: and the warning to **Munch** in this thread was uncalled for. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/57 "2013-04-19T19:26:50Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > And the point of the thread was to _mock_ at those sterotypes, which is what the posts that received the warning were doing. There was no warning. It was a mod note. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/58 "2013-04-19T19:35:37Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Ellen’s explicit reference to the misogyny thread seems to imply either a new rule or a new interpretation of existing rules. I think it pretty clear that this is a new application of an existing rule. As of the misogyny thread, off-topic posts that have as their basis a knee-jerk view of women as sex objects will constitute “being a jerk”. Sort of - since this is a new application, and since this only makes the boards less welcoming “in the aggregate”, it will be mod noted instead of warned or banned (although **Marley23** ’s reaction to being questioned on the topic by **Munch** appears not to bode well for that trend). Still, all we need is some kind of explanation as to how the joke was off-topic, or showed a knee jerk view of non-foul-mouthed, non-sorority women, as sex objects. Or maybe we will just have to live with the uncertainty. Given the number of posters who appear to have been blind-sided by the ruling, I hope not, but maybe it can’t be explained. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/59 "2013-04-19T20:22:52Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > There was no warning. It was a mod note. I misspoke, but it doesn’t change my point. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/60 "2013-04-19T20:39:00Z")
OH EM GEE! With the recent threads (YOU know which ones), the mods now have an existential crisis plunked down right in front of them, and they walked right into it! Now they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Pity the poor mods! :rolleyes: (I actually wrote a whole lot more than that in composing this post, but it really got into some “nm!” territory.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134.md?page=4)