Ilsa was a him??
go figure.
- But remember: your hand at the level of your eyes!
- But why?
- Why?! The Punjab lasso, monsieur! First Buquet - now Piangi!
:eek: 
Apropos this discussion: another one bites the dust. Lynn Bodoni strikes again! “I am moderator! Hear me roar!!!”
ROOOOWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrr!!!
:smack:
Knorf
May I say that this is the biggest crock of shit I have ever read, and I’ve seen too many variations of it over the last couple of years to not find it absurd beyond reason.
-
If you’ve never run afoul of a moderator yet, then why the hell do you care? Just keep doing what you’re doing, and you’ll be fine. Or are you “concerned” for other posters? Maybe I’m just a rude, self-centered ass, but I’ve never empathized with any other poster so greatly, especially those that would run afoul of a moderator, that I would threaten to leave if they were banned or even :gasp: warned.
-
Use your brain. I’d say use common sense, but I’ve long ago determined that common sense is nowhere near as common as the name implies. How can you not know what a ‘joke thread’ is? Particularly when porcupine and Jeff Olsen posted three succinct definitions? Though they’re not ‘official’ moderator definitions, they’re exactly the sorts of threads that have been closed for being jokes. It’s not hard to figure out.
Human interaction does not involve absolutes. It is as easy to be a jerk by spouting hate speech as it is to post nonsense threads, although the two are unrelated. What, you want them to explain each and every thing that can get you warned, suspended, or banned, so that anyone who wants to be an ass can be one by constantly toeing the line? Besides which, there’s about a thousand things at least that you can post that will bring the hammer down on you, and more that the mods probably haven’t even seen yet, shocking as it may be.
Remember, before you gripe about things being ‘too restrictive’, that for every one thing that will bring the hammer down, there’s over a hundred more that won’t. People just like pushing buttons, and button-pushing draws attention, so it seems like there’s a lot of wanton banning going on when it’s just enforced policy.
- Finally, what the everloving fuck do you honestly expect to gain from sticking your nose up in the air and making such BS comments such as the one quoted? What, do you want a refund on the money you paid to access this site? Do you want the moderators to kiss your ass when there’s 40-thousand-odd others around here? Do you want them to just let chaos reign? What do you expect, instant contrition and everyone falling all over themselves to make sure you, Knorf, Giver Of Happiness, don’t leave? I honestly don’t understand this at all.
I just looked back at the thread, and I see that your registration date is Dec ‘00, and you have 85 posts under your belt. That’s even less than mine, and I don’t even consider myself a poster here, but a regular lurker. And you’re threatening to stop posting? That’s a laugh in and of itself. You really don’t have an excuse for bitching about the moderators’ policies now, you know. Either you’ve been here long enough to be familiar with the board, or you’ve just started posting again, in which case you should get familiar before you put your foot in your mouth.
Now, I’ve typed all that out, and a lot of it I don’t direct specifically at you, Knorf. I’ve seen this attitude on message boards and communities everywhere, and it just boiled out into an impromptu rant. It may or may not completely apply to you, but I had to get it out of my system. I’m just shocked at A) the inability to actually use your cognitive capabilities to figure out what the moderators do and do not like, and B) the arrogance in saying that you may not want to continue posting here because of A, as if anyone actually gives a damn whether you stay or go.
Personally I have to say if it’s not in the “Pit Rules” it’s fucking stupid to suspend people b/c he’s said it ‘enough times’
Bullshit. There’s dozens of threads here that people never click on. Heck some posters don’t even read the pit. Why does this moderator get to decide it’s a rule but not put it in the rules?
That was my problem with it. It’s unacceptable to promulgate a rule by doing nothing other than assume that people will come to know about it by happening to be around when people get punished. Especially when what constitutes breaking the rule is highly unclear.
lissener, it seemed to me that the sole purpose of the your thread that I closed was either a joke, or to act sexually aggressive towards people. I chose to view it as a joke. Acting in a sexually aggressive way is a bannable offense.
In general, I’ve been screaming “NO JOKE THREADS IN THE PIT” for a long, long time now. Apparently, nobody has been listening. I have felt the need to make sure that people are, indeed, listening. I am not saying that people can’t use humor…however, I AM going to ensure that people are not using the Pit as a slightly dirtier MPSIMS.
Lynn
For the Straight Dope
Lynn Bodoni I don’t think anyone has a problem with a rule in the ‘pit rules’ on top that says No Joke threads followed by the definition between ‘joke thread’ and parody/satire/humorous rant. It’s the weird nature of having a spoken rule strike down posters that could very well be unaware of the rule.
Well, they’re not banned, they’re suspended. Look, I don’t open nearly every thread, but I was certainly well aware of Lynn’s rule a long time ago. Ignorance of the rules canot be allowed to become a defense (sound familiar?) I’m behind Lynn 100% on this.
Um, the reason why “ignorance of the law is not a defence” is because, theoretically, the law was made by a legislature and published abroad to all and sundry beforehand, as opposed to, say, only mentioned when punishing violations of the law (with a penalty that can increase at any time).
I’ve supported (either publicly by posting or just in my head) every banning/supension I’ve seen on here. I’ve found people that piss and moan about every banning being ‘unfair’ to be full of shit. But this is the one time I have to say there’s no way a person should be expected to be aware of ‘rules’ posted in random threads. I’m honestly lobbying for a addition to the ‘pit rules’ clairfying this. (maybe I should be posting to the discussion of the pit rules thread). After that I’ll be the first to cheer people suspended/banned by this rule. It’s just right now it seems like BS.
There have been quite a few threads about why joke threads are not allowed in the Pit. Some have been in the Pit itself, others have been in ATMB.
It’s IMPOSSIBLE for me to post a listing of every single rule, but most are just extensions of “Don’t be a jerk”. I think that the “No joke threads in the Pit” is such an extension…people are expecting a rant, and they are jerked around a bit.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned in moderating message boards over this past half dozen years (I’ve modded on AOL, too), it’s that NOTHING I do will please EVERYONE. So I will do the best I can. Generally, my boss will let me know if I’m doing something wrong.
I haven’t read this whole thread, just gave it a quick skim, but I do want to commend you Lynn on the decision to “suspend” and not “ban”. This is not to say that any poster in question did anything ban-worthy, nor that they would. But temporary suspensions are a good way of getting across a message of what’s acceptable vs. what isn’t here long before anyone crosses a line.
I tend to think that had this paractice been used all along, we’d still have December, Handy, Collounsbury (OK, maybe not Coll. since he got banned twice, though I wonder if repeated suspensions rather than bannings would have been more effective while keeping a valuable poster around), Zenster, and other longterm posters around.
I hate it when longterm posters get banned. I mean I really hate it. Ideally I think everyone who wants to be here should have a voice (excluding the obvious trolls and spammers of course). I’d love to see many of the “bannable” offenses become “suspendable” offenses.
And now that I realize this has little to do with the OP, I will step down from my little soapbox, and bid you all g’nite.
I like it. I can definitely remember it this way.
matt_mcl: Based on your Hitchhiker’s Guide reference, are we to think you plan to lay down in front of the bulldozer?
The rule isn’t in a random thread. It’s in the sticky in this forum labeled “Discussion of Pit Rules.” In it, Lynn clearly states why joke threads are not permitted in the Pit.
Moe, the practice of “suspensions” has been around all along; they’re just employing it a bit more frequently now. It seems like a good idea, in theory. People who are disregarding the rules or who are otherwise getting carried away can go into a “time out” for a (probably) brief amount of time. Then, when they come back, they’re calmer and more cognizant of the rules, making everyone happy. [Though when you say, “I’d love to see many of the “bannable” offenses become “suspendable” offenses,” I hope you’re not referring to trolling, which is one of the offenses that led to december’s banning.]
People may think that it’s not fair to enforce a rule that’s not spelled out. Well, it is spelled out in the sticky. “Oh ho,” you say, “but who reads those?” We all should. That’s why they’re stickies. 
Those who choose not to must suffer the consequences.
For the love of god. I finally found what you were talking about. On page 6. You actually expect people looking for the official rules to look through 6 pages of ‘discussion’ of pit rules instead of the single page called ‘pit rules’ to determine what is postable in the pit? And I note with amusement that it’s in response to someone apologizing for posting a joke in the pit b/c they ‘honestly didn’t know’ about the rule. Unless of course I missed an earlier reference.
Hey, I didn’t say it was easy to find, just that it’s there. In plain English.
Additionally, the post was made only last month; therefore people who have made recent joke threads in the pit cannot use the excuse that the rule was buried deep in some obscure thread. It’s in a sticky about the rules, in a post that was made quite recently.
Now, you could be of a mind to ignore sticky threads - and that’d be your prerogative - but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring the sticky.
Respectfully, Lynn, and accepting the blame for a lack of clarity and an unsuccessful satire, it was neither of the alternatives you considered. It was a satire of an attitude of which straightforward discussion was accomplishing nothing. I was trying to forward the discussion by highlighting the outrageousness of the characterization of a certain position on a certain issue. Again, I’m sorry that was not clearer, but–again, respectfully–I’d like to have been given the opportunity to justify it, rather than have it quashed.
Still respectfully, Lynn, repeating it does nothing to clarify it. I am aware of the “rule”–NO JOKE THREADS IN THE PIT–but am apparently not alone in not being aware of the definition of that rule: I thought I was following it, as did Ilsa. To quote Buffy, “could you vague that up for me a bit?”
Well, for what it’s worth, speaking strictly for myself, the effect of your ill-defined but well-enforced campaign has been to make me extremely reluctant to use humor in the Pit. Which, as I say, may be a good thing.
Does this mean the only way to address this is write directly to Ed? I’d assumed the “proper channel” would be to go through mods/admins, rather than taking everything directly to Ed. Please advise; I’ll follow whatever procedure is appropriate.