IMO the mods have been quite lenient with this issue and actually could have warned Skald a lot sooner when he started posting the passive-aggressive “no rape here!” notices instead of posting a notice only when rape is included. It should be a pretty easy rule to follow and stems from rules already in force, really. It’s not that severe, like a topic ban or outright ban.
I personally just avoid all his threads anyway because I find his hypotheticals frankly too long, drawn out and boring, but there may be people who are new or don’t know about him.
Boeing mine: no, he wasn’t. He was modded for failing to follow moderators instructions in his disingenuous disclaimer.
I agree that the warning could have been more explicit, but the “acting like this” part of my warning was referencing the snarky attitude he was exhibiting.
But why is he being moderated for exhibiting a snarky attitude, if he’s otherwise following a rule to warn other posters of specific kinds of content in an OP?
And in the final ruling in the now closed ATMB thread he was specifically instructed to only include warnings if there was sexual content and not to do so otherwise.
Because he’s not trying to follow the rules, he’s injecting butthurt commentary about being called out on his inserting his humiliation porn fetish into his posts. Doesn’t that pretty much define being a jerk? Isn’t that the Dope’s longtime rule, to not be a jerk? It seems to me if Skald genuinely didn’t mean any harm, he’d apologize and attempt to change his ways. He clearly does this for sexual gratification, and that’s why he hasn’t tried to defend himself, because he can’t.
Yes, that’s what I was referring to as an unnecessary escalation of the problem. There was no need to tell him to “knock it off with the false disclaimers.” It would have been wiser to let it slide. We don’t need to police bad attitudes here.
You mean the rule about “don’t be a jerk”? That seems like the very essence of policing bad attitudes. He was told not to do it, and he did. That shouldn’t be policed?
If Skald is behaving like a jerk, and all the evidence suggests he is, then ban him. But please don’t impose this juvenile trigger warning shit on the rest of us.
Posters often have bad attitudes, and that should be fine. A bad attitude and being a jerk may be overlapping sometimes, but not necessarily.
The trespass in this case was including unexpectedly explicit material in posts. The solution was to require a warning. Once he started including warnings, that should have been the end of it, regardless of whether there was any “bad attitude” behind it.
If he’s just showing his ass to the world with his attitude, we can all judge his character for ourselves.
A sarcastic non-disclaimer disclaimer isn’t actually a problem that I think needs moderator intervention, just as signing every post “Regards, Shodan” or “Let’s go throw things in the quarry” should prompt moderator intervention.
It sounds like you want to debate the decision but the decision has been made and clearly stated. He violated the ruling twice and was noted for it. He blatantly violated it again and got a warning.
If he can’t manage to not post that way, he can find somewhere else to go. Or he’ll get banned eventually and that will be the end of it.
I’m expressing disagreement with the moderation instructions. Am I not allowed to do that?
If the moderation instructions included “don’t include sarcastic disclaimers on posts that don’t need them,” then I’m saying that was an error on the part of the moderators. It should have been limited to “include disclaimers when they are needed.”
Just rescind that part of it and call it a day. Not every enforcement action need be defended to the hilt. Back off when it’s appropriate. And I say that backing off is appropriate in this situation.