We only appear small because you’re so high up above us.
Does anyone ELSE have to say, “this thread does NOT contain blah blah blah”?
No, it’s obvious Skald’s only putting those, “this thread does NOT contain” because he’s butthurt that he has to do so when he makes a thread with explicit content, so he figures, “hey, I’ll put a warning in EVERY thread I make, not just the ones they want me to! That’ll show 'em!”
The problem with “don’t read them” is that Skald would sometimes write one of his hypotheticals with an innocent sounding title like, “Would you advise a friend to break up with her boyfriend in this situation?” And then all of a sudden somewhere in the middle, he’d drop in this really gross sexual aspect to it, usually in very graphic detail. Kind of like a Rick roll.
So people just said, “dude, do you think you could give us a heads-up at the beginning of the thread if you’re gonna include something like that? You know, NSFW, viewer discretion advised etc?” Pretty reasonable don’t you think? But apparently not.
As for him now including these warnings in ALL of his threads.
Say I’m watching TV. And there’s a documentary about the Nanking Massacre on. I’m guessing there’ll be something like, “This program contains scenes of graphic violence, blah blah blah. Viewer discretion advised.” Right?
However, if it’s a documentary about turtles, I doubt very much they’ll have, “This program does NOT contain scenes of graphic violence. Viewer discretion NOT advised.” But that’s pretty much what Skald is now doing, simply because he’s pissed off about a very simple request.
Not if you don’t read any of his threads and/or put him on ignore.
Hey, for all the helpful people who insist on chiming in for the 3,496,274,305th time with “BUT WHY DON’T YOU JUST NOT READ IT AND PUT HIM ON IGNORE HUH HUH HUH?” and especially the ones who cannot be arsed to do even one tiny bit of research to find out what it is they’re bloviating about–maybe, just once, try shutting UP and moving on WITHOUT insisting on giving the whole world your completely uninformed, worthless and unwelcome opinion? Just a thought.
Because if you just can’t do it, cannot help yourself from storming in and venting your opinion–maybe your advice is pretty worthless, y’think? I mean, if you can’t even follow it yourself why are you expecting everyone else in the world to?
What about a new poster who doesn’t know “hey, that guy is likely to drop specific rape scenarios into innocent sounding threads”? I believe there was someone who is new that stumbled into his “relationship hypothetical, with surprise humiliation porn built in”.
But why should the onus be on all the people who don’t like surprise humiliation porn to act and put him on ignore? Why can’t the poster, as was decided by the mods, put disclaimers on threads that warrant them?
Well, it does appear I’m one of the few people that isn’t getting all worked up by someone stating that their OP dosesn’t contain any rape.
The main complaint seems to be that he’s pushing everyone’s buttons on purpose, but he can only do that if you let him.
Ignore his threads.
Ignore his disclaimer.
Take his disclaimer for what it says, you don’t want to read a thread about incest porn, well, this one won’t have any.
I get what everyone is saying, it just seems to me to be an odd thing to get fired up about. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around everyone being upset because he said his thread(s) would not contain any graphic sexual content.
He’s deliberately introducing rape into ALL his threads now, with bullshit disclaimers that innocently insist that he’s not going to talk about rape in THIS one, nosiree not this one at all.
And he’s doing it to be a jerk.
This … doesn’t seem like a successful strategy. I suggest letting him post all the unnecessary disclaimers he wants, so long as the necessary disclaimers are also in place. This makes it seem like the mods are escalating the dispute. Let him be petulant if he wants. Just ignore it.
How is “there is no rape in the following hypothetical” the same as “introducing rape”? There’s still no rape in the hypothetical.
Because it’s so obviously trolling. Pardon me mods, but that’s exactly what it is.
Right. That’s ALWAYS the suggested solution when a poster acts like a douche. “Well, just ignore him/her! Don’t read his/her threads!”
:rolleyes:
Besides, if Skald is so pissy about having to add a disclaimer, why didn’t he come into the thread about it and defend himself? Hey, he’s welcome to answer it here.
If someone is taking a dump in the corner of my house, I’m not inclined to ignore it. The “I’m not touching you” routine is taking a dump on mod guidance. It will stop one way or another and there is a process that is followed. Communication has been clear and in advance - there is no basis that this is a surprise.
Thats been debated at length and is not the subject of this thread. The issue was resolved by the mods after weighing user input and we decided this was the most equitable solution.
This thread is about the application of that decision, and I’ve answered questions on that point.
I suggest that perhaps you take your own advice and ignore this thread, if the basis of this topic is that troublesome to you.
sigh
If you get it, then why don’t you let the mods continue to deal with Skald as they have been doing? If it doesn’t get you worked up, don’t worry about it.
I asked what was going on and the response was "This probably isn’t the time to ask. I’d take too long to explain the backstory that answers this. I don’t know if anyone has the energy left. "
I’ll keep that in mind going forward. Thank you for telling me what you think of my advice.
We had that same problem for a long time with Dio. The advice was always to ignore him and people always asked about new posters that weren’t aware of The Dio Show. It was years before anything really became of that, at least from an administrative pov.
Having said that, I thought the issue was that he’s taking benign threads and saying that there’s no rape/incest/porn in them. My WAG is that a brand new member, stumbling into that thread, not knowing any of the history, might find it odd, but probably not give it too much thought beyond that.
This is where I’m getting tripped up. Lets assume all threads that warrant disclaimers get them. What I don’t understand is why everyone has an issue with the threads that don’t warrant them also get them (or get ones saying there’s no ____ in this thread).
To me, at least, it just seems like a non-issue.
I got no dog in this fight, I haven’t read a skald thread in years (for issues not relating to any of this), so I’m very much trying to see this from the outside. It just seems to me if people are calling him childish for his anti-disclaimers (I don’t know what to call them), others are being equally childish for getting worked up over it.
As for the onus being on the reader, I suggest that because then it’s over and done with. If the kid next to you has their finger a half inch from your face and yells “I’m not touching you”, you can either keep telling on him and hope the teacher does something about it or you can go sit somewhere else and it won’t happen anymore.
It is a successful strategy generally. I remain hopeful that it will be here, and that expecting a poster to follow mod instructions is not an unreasonable one. If Skald has any issues or complaints about our request, he has yet to respond or communicate with us about it.
It’s not troublesome to me, my advice to ignore a thread that bothers you wouldn’t apply here since this thread doesn’t bother me.
But seeing as enough people appear to be bothered by my posts and have gone far enough to call me worthless. I’ll get my popcorn and just watch from the sidelines.
In this case, the teacher (aka the mods) DID do something. And people bitched that it wasn’t fair for said teacher to do so, that the kid should be allowed to continue acting like that.
THAT’S why. If Skald wants to act like a dick, fine, the mods will deal with him. But it’s the people who defend him that annoy me.
What a good thing I reviewed before posting, since I was typing out almost the exact same thing.
I’m not going to take a side in this childish affair at the moment because I haven’t looked into the backstory yet. I will say that the mod posting for the closure was unclear. Such notes are not only for the OP or modded poster, they tell the rest of us how the rules are being applied. It looks like Skald was being warned for including graphic sexual content. So at least try to be more clear about what a warning or note is about. We aren’t mods, we shouldn’t have to read every thread and post to understand what is going on. I’m sure the ambiguity was not intentional so I’m only poster noting ITD, but if it happens again I may issue a poster warning.
The problem is that you don’t see how you offended them with some of your comments. While you’re on the sidelines, why not read the last 4 pages of the locked ATMB thread. It might be enlightening.