I personally have never seen a mod give out a warning for the language rules.
I think it entirely possible that
- Snowboarder Bo wants to know why the mods didn’t enforce this rule, and
- Snowboarder Bo is simultaneously upset that he got insulted and the mods didn’t do anything about it.
From my perspective, I don’t really care that the only reason Snowboarder Bo is concerned about the question is because it affected him. I don’t see how that changes the fact that he asked a fair question. That the rules are bullshit and the mods are tapdancing around to enforce them as lightly as possible is a reasonable response to the general question.
The specific incidents were answered.
Regarding the requests for clarification, as I see it, there are the rules the way Ed would like them, and there are the rules the way they are written. Because Ed doesn’t actually read or post here, the mods have leeway to moderate within the way the rules are written, and truncate any ambiguity to their own preference. Ergo, the mods elect to go as tightly on “variants” as they can.
Now, if somebody wants to go whine to Ed and bring this moderation interpretation to Ed’s attention and get him poking his nose in here again, they certainly could. But why would you want to? The record suggests that will not end favorably for anyone here. It’s not likely to get Ed to rescind those rules. It might get the mods handslapped for not moderating the spirit, but I think they are pretty well covered by the letter of the rules, and if Ed comes down too hard on them, well, they are volunteers. The most likely outcome would be Ed revamping the rules in some way to make them more stringent, or spell out more specifics, or give instructions to the mods on how to moderate the ambiguity. Leading to more bullshit rules that most of this board think we shouldn’t have in the first place.
I personally think the questions have been asked and answered, and what’s left is a fight over Snowboarder Bo’s motivations. That shouldn’t be in ATMB.
I can go back to the other threads on this topic and quote a few more if you like. My point is just that if you feel that multiple people are continuously misunderstanding you, you need to be more clear.
It was a valid question, and has since been answered. Don’t think you’re going to change the mods’ minds on this, you’ve been here long enough to know that’s futile.
They only seem to issue cautionary advisories without actual warnings. Few posters push the issue unless they’re trolls.
Yeah, I’ve lots of mod notes but no actual warnings.
That it takes nearly a year for people to get pissed off enough at an annoying behavior to start complaining about it is not at all the same as taking nearly a year to notice it. Point FAIL.
This is flat out untrue. It’s not even close to accurate. You are so far from being right here that i can only conclude that you never even bothered to check the claim that you are making.
A search of Snowboarder Bo’s post for the word “quarry” shows that he used his little catchphrase for the first time on December 16, 2011.
On January 4, 2012, Frank started a Pit thread in which he provided 20 examples of Bo using the phrase over the previous few weeks. By my calculation, that’s a period of 19 days between Bo’s first use of the phrase and the first person telling him to knock it off.
Just over a week later, on January 13, Absolute started an ATMB thread asking the Mods to tell Bo to knock it off.
So, if 19 days and 28 days qualify as “nearly a year,” then i guess you’re right. Otherwise, you’re completely wrong.
Well sweet jesus, mhendo!
He first posted it in 2011 and it wasn’t until all the way in 2012 that he got pitted for it. That’s a whole year right there, isn’t it?
I don’t feel that way. Thanks for the advice tho; I’m sure it will be invaluable in the future.
Not to open a can of worms, but I didn’t have a problem with the old pit rules, nor do I have a problem with the new pit rules.* In fact, I wouldn’t have a problem with far more restrictive pit rules. I can adapt. The insistence that one needs to use 24 caliber cuss words or the claim that the principle of restricting one’s usage of such words harshes one’s vibe strikes me as childish. Ed’s efforts, OTOH, seem to me to be entirely defensible though they admittedly didn’t work out particularly well – or so it seems.
- Nor do I have a problem with the current interpretation of the pit rules. Nor would I have a problem with another interpretation of the pit rules, if the current mods deem it fit.
Irishman, I don’t intend to single you out here in any way. I hope it doesn’t come off as if I am.
Actually Ed approved this approach almost exactly three years ago: Pit Rules, Revisited - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board
See specifically: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11378592&postcount=32
I’ve said the same thing in many other threads, and Ed has also approved this approach elsewhere, both on the board and off.
So once again:
- This approach is anything but new.
- It’s the approach that I told everybody I would apply when I became a Pit Moderator.
- Ed knows.
- Pay attention
- Thanks all
**
Gfaptor**
Admode
Gfactor, thanks for the info. I can’t say that it exactly clarifies the rules themselves, but it does show that the interpretation of the rules does have some standard and also has explicit approval from Ed. Had I been aware of that thread, there would have been no need for this one (obviously). Thanks again.
Thank you for the clarification, Gfactor.
You’re both welcome. 
I for one demand less clarification. I demand total confusion, misdirection and wild speculation!
Hang in, there. There’s always next week.