What, EXACTLY, is a "joke thread"?

[dantheman]

*Originally posted by lissener *
**Laur, what if you’re satirizing a general attitude, or something that affords no linkage? As I’ve said, clarity is the responsiblity of the OP, so that’s not necessarily something most folks should try at home. But if you DO post without such a safety net, I would think a mod might interject, as they have in other circumstances, something along the lines of, “This thread appears to be a joke thread. If the OP doesn’t provide a convincing clarification of his/her point, I’m closing this thread.” **

But they’re under no obligation to do so, especially if it’s patently obvious that the thread in question is intended to be humorous, e.g., a joke, a parody, or a satire.

Whenever a moderator or administrator closes a thread or officially warns a poster, the OP of that thread or that poster can email the official at his or her leisure to plead their case. That is, if you feel your thread was closed unfairly, you can explain your reasons to the moderator or administrator who closed it, and perhaps the thread will be reopened. I’m sure this would apply to perceived joke threads as well.

[Helen_s_Eidolon]

lissener, if I were in that position, I would link to an example or two. This is a question of clarity in the OP. I think I read one of the threads you’re referring to, and it was very unclear that it was a parody.

[lissener]

*Originally posted by dantheman *
**. . . That is, if you feel your thread was closed unfairly, you can explain your reasons to the moderator or administrator who closed it, and perhaps the thread will be reopened. I’m sure this would apply to perceived joke threads as well. **

Has anyone ever seen a thread reponed after it’s been closed?

[lissener]

Wring, I have emailed a mod after having a thread closed as a “joke” thread, asking to be given a chance to clarify why it was NOT in fact a joke thread, and heard no response back.

[dantheman]

I have seen a previously closed thread reopened. I can’t give a cite, but I do recollect it happening. It’s certainly rare, but it can and does happen.

[wring]

yes, I’ve seen threads re-opened.

you’ve emailed and asked to clarify or did you clarify in the email?

If you clarified in the email, and they didn’t respond and didn’t reopen the thread, I’d surmise that your clarification didn’t make any difference in their assesment.

If you asked to clarify in an email and did not get an answer then that’s a different issue.

[dantheman]

It’s also wise to email more than just the one who closed the thread, because that person may not be online at the time.

[Skywatcher]

*Originally posted by dantheman *
**It’s also wise to email more than just the one who closed the thread, because that person may not be online at the time. **

Or even on vacation, this being the holiday season.

[Q.E.D]

*Originally posted by Bryan Ekers *
**Frankly, I’m just surprised to see that “Suspended” exists as a user status. **

The admins can put anything under your username that they wish. Lynn once put “Asshat” under one username, as a joke.

[j_kat_251]

Last I looked, which was last night, the rules posted in ATMB state that parodies do not require a link.

[dantheman]

*Originally posted by Q.E.D. *
**The admins can put anything under your username that they wish. Lynn once put “Asshat” under one username, as a joke. **

Unless I’m thinking of a different person, it was actually “Too Stupid for Words” that was appended.

[Helen_s_Eidolon]

*Originally posted by j_kat_251 *
**Last I looked, which was last night, the rules posted in ATMB state that parodies do not require a link. **

Try the “Pit Rules” sticky at the top of this very forum.

[Knorf]

I agree with lissener 100% on this one. There is absolutely no clarity on what exactly qualifies as a joke thread: neither as stated by Lynn–who I agree is often ludicrously censorious in wielding her power as moderator–nor by any contibutor in this thread.

Though I have never run afoul of a moderator in the pit, these types of issues also have a chilling effect on my own interest in posting here. I’m sure lissener and I are not alone; and I for certain do not otherwise fit the role of trouble-maker.

Frankly, I don’t see what it accomplished with an such intolerant and inconsistent application of often vague, but in any case arbitrary rules, except to either give the moderator a mini power-trip fix or to dampen the spirit of free expression in this forum.

Possibly both.

:mad:

Knorf

[Q.E.D]

*Originally posted by dantheman *
**Unless I’m thinking of a different person, it was actually “Too Stupid for Words” that was appended. **

In this thread, Otto got to enjoy the Asshat status, compliments of Lynn.

[dantheman]

Ah, that’s just it. He got to enjoy it. My feller didn’t enjoy his appellation.

[Q.E.D]

You remember who it was that got “Too stupid for words”? I’ve seen it referenced, but the name escapes me.

[dantheman]

Yep, this one: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?s=&action=getinfo&userid=4911

[Q.E.D]

Ah, that’s the one. Much appreciated, thanks.

[El_Cid_Viscoso]

Phew! I am so relieved since you posted that link, dan. I’m just going to sit here for a while and be happy.

lissener, honestly, if we made a rule about all the sticky bits here at the SDMB, we’d need a Governing Council. That thread was a joke. Heck, he’s a self-admitted thread-bumper and pest, but I like Ilsa.

Like him or not, as soon as I saw the thread title, I knew he’d pushed it. He’ll be back. Hopefully this Time-Out makes a difference.

[Tapioca_Dextrin]

I don’t think the smilie volcano endeared him to Lynn either.

Won’t someone think of the hamsters?