The question is not if a bit of humor fell flat, or if the point could have been made in a way that a librarian with puckered lips and a too tight bow tie might find permissible. No, the point is that what I wrote was equally fine as far as what people post on these boards (outside the Pit) all the time. It required zero moderation. You do this more than any moderator I can recall. If you were a ref in the NBA there’s be a whistle every 1.3 seconds. You really should employ a much lighter touch. The boards did fine without your overbearing, persnickety, Moderation a la Marley’s Whim. It would be better if you would stop it. Hell, you’ve got people coming to my defense who are certainly not on my side of any debate I can recall.
And this is why I love the SDMB administration. For its open-mindedness.
Heavens to Murgatroid! Now you’ve gone and done it.
It does matter that your “humor” was more insulting than funny, yes.
Say, remember that thread where you got modded a bunch of times for saying that other people were uptight and didn’t have a sense of humor instead of addressing the content of their posts? You’re doing that again.
Your point has changed a couple of times, and I don’t agree with this version either. I didn’t think your commentary about Left Hand of Dorkness was acceptable. ‘You’re up on a high horse’ is far from the worst insult I’ve ever seen in this forum, but it’s insulting and it’s not necessary. It isn’t what we want in this forum. Your post was rude and I expected it was going to get worse from there. I tried to tell you this in a mod note and that could’ve been the end of the entire situation, but you wouldn’t let it go. You felt obliged to post some more insults to explain that your first insult was justified, then say none of the insults were insults, then say you should be able to Pit the mods because you can’t insult them, and now you’re saying none of this should have been modded.
Perhaps you should use a lighter touch and not insult people. The point you say you were trying to make - that you disagree with Left Hand of Dorkness about the style of moderation you want to see - did not require insults like saying he’s up on a high horse or that he’s priggish. We have a rule that says you can’t insult other posters outside the Pit. We don’t have a rule that says ‘use a light touch.’
I’m not sure what you expected. We’ve had this rule for four years, it was debated extensively at the time, and in general we’re happy with the way it’s worked out. Did you think it was going to get overturned because magellan01 wasn’t aware of it or wasn’t sure about our reasoning?
Say, remember all those times when you piped in with some moderation when you were not needed and people called you on it and then you wasted everyone’s time by shucking and jiving and not admitting your error and you looked like the kid who got no respect in high school and now he’s a cop and he’s going to make sure people respect him now, BY GOLLY!!!? You’re doing it again. In two threads at the same time, to boot! Marvelous work, Officer.
It’s not “insulting” to any normal person. And it was done with a light touch. He even said he wasn’t insulted. And “necessary” is not the metric you should be using. It’s ridiculous. Except as it appliees to moderation: if it’s not necessary, stay out of it. They should tattoo that on your forehead in reverse so you see it every time you you straighten your mod cap in the mirror. People should be able to express themselves.
No, I felt obliged to let you know that you were wrong. You were wrong about your initial moderation of “high horse”. And wrong about moderating my explanation that he was being priggish. Add that to your initial error in judgment concerning “gun grabbers” :eek:, and you have yourself a hat trick. Well done!
And I’ve always been of the opinion that my comments to LHOD should not have been modded. That’s the whole friggin point. Didn’t know why you think otherwise.
Again, “require” is not a metric you should be concerning yourself with. One could point to any post on these boards and use your, “well, that wasn’t really necessary.” Not one word on these boards in necessary. This is a ridiculous metric for you or anyone to use. And describing that post of his as “priggish” was not insulting. And it was apt. That’s why the word exists, to describe things like that.
Maybe we should. For all mods called Marley who consistently find themselves in the same arguments. As I’ve seen a hundred times on these boards, including outside the Pit, “Lighten up, Francis.”
And what percentage of the “hundred times” are from you? You’re claiming this great concensus of posters that agree with you about Marley23’s modding, but so far it looks like you, a couple of others, and the mice in your pocket.
You know, typically people resort to insults like this when they can’t make an argument. This is a textbook example.
Use a lighter touch.
Which you did by calling Left Hand of Dorkness a prig, then saying “but he IS a prig!” when I told you to stop, then calling me a prig because my decision was “bullshit,” then saying prig was never an insult. You know how the rules work around here: you can tell us if you think we’re wrong, but if we tell you to stop doing it, you can’t repeat the thing we just told you to stop doing to prove your point.
I’ve explained it exhaustively.
I am discussing the necessity of the comment in context of the conversation. If you don’t agree with the way Left Hand of Dorkness wants the board to be modded, it’s not necessary to say he’s up on his high horse and being a prig. You can explain why you don’t want the same type of moderation he wants - which you did after I told you half a dozen times to stop calling him a prig, so it’s clear you know how to do it. The issue is the type of moderation that’s desired, not Left Hand of Dorkness as an individual.
Words like “idiot” and “fuckwit” also exist to describe particular things. They’re still insults. Prig is a mild insult, but the definition I showed you makes it obvious it is an insult.
0.57%.
And you are incorrect, possibly lying, in claiming that I’ve claimed some great consensus who agree with me about Officer Marley’s moderation. I have no idea if they do. I’ll go as far as to say they’d probably vote with the shiny badge. What I did say was that he even got posters that I can’t recall agreeing with me on anything (and that’s putting things mildly for one poster in particular) to voice support for my position over his.
Yeah, but you know. Might’ve been *Rioja *goggles.
If you find that type of description insulting, maybe there is hope. Now all you have to do is stop the type of conduct described.
How light? I can’t read your mind. I don’t know what is going to satisfy your whim. I gave you a list of words to judge, but no, that would be too helpful. Or more accurately, it would deprive you of putting your finger on the scale whenever it strikes your fancy. The person who needs to use a lighter touch is you. “High horse”, “priggish”, “gun grabbers”… :rolleyes: You’re turning moderation into a bad joke.
Here’s a list of words that I might have used to describe LHOD’s post in lieu of “priggish”. PLease, pray tell, which of these would you have blessed and which would have caused you to wield your moderator’s machete?
[ul]
[li]pedantic[/li]didactic
preachy
punctilious
doctrinaire
dogmatic
overbearing
pompous
fussy
captious
persnickety
overly-delicate
genteel
finicky
fastidious
[/ul]
Please, which words would have been fine with you. And please explain how they would have been better. I mean all of them can be taken as to point to a negative aspect.
God, you’re being dense. NO COMMENT ON THESE BOARDS IS NECESSARY. No word. No phrasing. I disagreed with him and made the point in a very light way. I broke no rule. EXCEPT the READ MARLEY"S MIND RULE before you post. And then as soon as your judgement is questioned—again—you scramble to build a wall around yourself. When I explain that I though his comment was—cover your ears—priggish, you find some violation in that. Amazing.
Bullshit. It can be intended as a mild insult. Go back and look at how I used it. Here. I’ll make it easy for you:
[QUOTE=Marley23]
You didn’t ‘comment on the proper tone.’ You said Left Hand of Dorkness was up on his high horse, which was insulting.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=magellan01]
It’s a way of making the point he was being priggish. Which should have been clear from the “Lighten up.” that immediately followed it.
[/QUOTE]
Does that sound like I was trying to level an insult?
And then you gave me an official Warning:
[QUOTE=Marley23]
And for some reason you’re not able to understand that you can’t do this in this forum. You are not allowed to insult people here. This is a formal warning.
[/QUOTE]
How complicated is “don’t insult other people?” If you are making an argument and it’s not necessary to comment on the other person, don’t make comments about the other person.
I am not playing this game. I will not play it no matter how many times you ask. So you can stop asking now.
Here we go again.
I already explained exactly what “necessary” meant. You can release the shift key.
Why should I rely on your opinion of what’s “light?” You have some very strong opinions on how everybody else should interpret your posts, but you don’t seem to put as much thought into what you are saying yourself. Everything is within the rules according to your interpretation (no matter what the people who enforce the rules say) and all comments are “light” and “humorous,” and the problem is always with everyone else- and in some cases the dictionary.
Does this?
Of course, not. Marley must be able to moderate according to whim.
And I explained that your explanation is useless.
This gets to the point. You should be using a lighter hand. Moderate when it is clearly needed. Otherwise, let things go. Let people express themselves in the manner they see fit. If things get ugly—clearly—then step in. We have three examples being discussed right now where the post wasn’t the problem, your moderation was. It let to more of a problem than if you would have let each of the three instances go. That’s not helpful moderation.
[QUOTE=Marley23]
Does this?
[/QUOTE]
Nice try. But you WARNED me before that…after the instance I provided. Here is the exchange again:
[QUOTE=Marley23]
You didn’t ‘comment on the proper tone.’ You said Left Hand of Dorkness was up on his high horse, which was insulting.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=magellan01]
It’s a way of making the point he was being priggish. Which should have been clear from the “Lighten up.” that immediately followed it.
[/QUOTE]
That resulted in a warning.
Does that sound like I was trying to level an insult?
You didn’t explain anything. You just ignored it.
I know what you think about the posts already. Can you entertain any other perspective here?
Here’s the full exchange. [I’m adding the first post you responded to and I wanted to note that I had the mod-hat on the entire time]:
So here is what actually happened: you made a snide comment about another poster being up on his high horse and needing to lighten up. I explained - after another post from each of you - that you needed to stop, and that if the two of you had a personal problem, it should be handled in the Pit. You said (after the pointless “Wow”) that he was being priggish. I’d already told you that the personal comments weren’t appropriate and that they belonged in the Pit, and I followed up by telling you you could discuss the rules but couldn’t comment about him personally. Then I explained why you couldn’t do that. Then you said he was being priggish again, after I’d told you not to do that and explained several times why you couldn’t. Then I gave you a warning.
Woah there:
When my toddler, unhappy with going to time-out, hits me, I don’t feel attacked, but she did make an attack on me. That’s the only sense in which I didn’t feel insulted: you certainly made an insult, but it was entirely too feeble to have any effect. Not only did I not say it wasn’t an insult, but you quoted my first response to your post, which was to say it was the sort of post that I wish would receive more moderator attention.
The intact nature of my tender feelings, the nonhurtedness of my butt, has nothing to do with your intent. I’m perfectly happy either with you learning not to even try to insult people, or with you flaming out; my Impossible Dream is to have this messageboard have fewer insults, lame or otherwise.
Edit: If you want a comparison, look up my pit thread of Sampiro some years back: he insulted me in GD with such vicious cleverness that I totally lost my temper at him. Same intent, but much more effective.
Yes, whoa…
[QUOTE=magellan01]
So, tell me, were you seriously offended by my post?
[/QUOTE]
I wasn’t offended, but if we’re being honest, that’s because I considered the source.
[/QUOTE]
(emphasis mine)
You’re trying to have it both ways. Not a very proper and forthright way to debate, now is it, Mr. Straight & Narrow?
Has it possibly dawned on out that there was no effort to insult you? Your post sounded a little Little Lord Fauntelroy-ish, and I gently made that point. If your butt wasn’t hurt, I’m not surprised, as it was not my intent. All this talk of it being an insult that you needed to be protected from comes from The Mind of Marley. For heavens sake, we’re talkin a “high horse” reference here. Oh the horrors! But now, you, of course, are quick to talk out of both sides of your face after the fact to ingratiate yourself with the Mod who came to protect you. Nice symbiosis.
And, of course, all your backhanded insults to me are just fine. I guess Marley does have his hands full.
Your comment was a little misleading, and he’s right to point that out. You said he wasn’t offended; he replied that he wasn’t offended but he knew you were trying to insult him. Since you’ve been denying that any insult was intended, that does matter.
You said he was up on a high horse, then said it was his fault if your post was unproductive, then called him priggish twice, “quit” the thread by calling him a prig again, then said he wasn’t a human being, didn’t have a sense of humor, and took himself too seriously. That’s a lot of non-effort, particularly considering that the entire time I was telling you that your commentary was inappropriate for this forum.
And here we are again with more comments about the poster. What is it going to take to get this across to you? If you have a personal problem with him, Pit him. If not, argue the issue without all this crap. At the beginning of this quote you did manage to say you were talking about the post even though you’re continuing on a theme I’ve told you to knock it off - but by the end you’re insulting the poster again.
Honestly, I’m a little surprised that, after two warnings for continuing his insults, and he’s continuing his insults, he’s still allowed to post here. He’s pretty blatantly ignoring the warnings and continuing exactly the behavior that got him two warnings; doesn’t that speak pretty loudly?
It speaks pretty loudly about magellan01’s understanding what I have been telling him in plain English if nothing else. But this isn’t helpful and I think most posters would be annoyed by speculation about bans and flameouts (as you posted earlier), so let me attempt to explain what’s going on to magellan01 and try to refrain from that kind of commentary.
How dare you, sir–how DARE you! I’m off to start three more threads about how unfair this comment is!
Eh, on second thought, you’re probably right; I’ll knock it off.