Bingo, baby.
Actually, that brings me to a technical question. What does the Ignore function look like? I don’t have anyone on Ignore, so I have no idea. Is there a placeholder for the ignored person’s post, or is the presence of the poster excised completely?
Everyone calling badchad a troll (and there are dozens of you) is either:
A) Accusing an innocent person of trollery
or
B) Feeding a troll
Neither is acceptable behavior. Which are you doing?
I just did it just to see what would happen (oh, the sacrifices I make for my fellow Dopers 
). There is a placeholder that says
I am now going to remove it, because for some reason, I find that way more annoying than just skimming or skipping someone’s post.
Ask Polycarp if he thinks my arguments are stupid and weak.
Hello everyone, I have something to say, my name is Pedro and I don’t have a problem with badchad. waves to the group
Wow, way to stick your neck out there! I admire your courage. :rolleyes:
So if he’s been a jerk, and he’s reported for being a jerk and the mods do nothing we’re at fault for calling for moderation that we paid for? Bullshit.
No, it means that the mods as a whole don’t think moderation is called for. Suck it up.
You have moderators in your pocket? That explains a lot, I never did figure why anyone would take this job.
Why yes. In fact, you are. Board policy is that if you think someone is breaking the rules, you report the post and leave the decision in the staff’s hands from that point on. You do not create hatefests directed at the alleged offender that total dozens of pages of vitriol.
“The moderation you paid for” does not equal “the decisions you want the moderators to make.” It’s a membership fee, not a bribe.
Personally I don’t see how a member can post on only one topic, a contentious and heated one at that, which lends itself almost every time to hijacking, usually for the only purpose of attacking others.
And, although I’ll refrain from calling it ‘stalking,’ I also can’t fathom how going after someone (in this case it’d be Poly and tom) for basically superfluous reasons, doesn’t constitute “being a jerk.”
Dear Og, I can’t imagine what else it would take to cross that line.
Disclaimer: This solely MY opinion, under what I believe the definitions call for. I have nothing against bc for being an atheist, even a vehement one at that, but because he obviously (to me) is the epitome of why we have our governing rule to begin with. Sadly, I think he knows he can continue to venture even more forth and have the “We have to be (overly) impartial!” system on his side.
Um, the mods *are * moderating. See Giraffe’s post above: they’ve discussed it and come to a decision. That’s called moderating.
Which brings us to a discussion of the Rule. “Don’t be a jerk” is just the kind of rule that one might put in place because everyone knows when someone is a jerk. Except, of course, that it is a completely arbitrary and subjective designation. You think badchad is a jerk. I don’t. Where does that leave us? With a dumb and ambiguous “rule” that can’t be evaluated in any objective, meaningful manner.
Also, what in the name of hell is “an (overly) impartial system?” You’re seriously complaining that the board moderation is attempting to be impartial in this case? “He needed bannin’” is not really a valid prosecutorial tactic.
:rolleyes: If it makes you feel better, I’ll say this instead:
“No, it means that the mods as a whole don’t think banning is called for. Suck it up.”
I’m more than happy to suck it up. No, I do not have the mods in my pocket.
No, I am not at fault for speaking my wishes.
My membership gives me the right to my opinion. I was responding to Cisco who suggested any recourse to badchad was equal to or worse than his behavior. It is not.
Just thought I’d add my 2 cents’ worth. After paying my $15 or so for membership, I’d not want to be continually harassed by some immature kid. So if that were to happen, I’d simply activate the Ignore feature I noticed so as not to be bothered by his childishness any more. Continuing to engage such people only gives them the attention they crave. I have better things to do.
I’m not arguing that the rule isn’t nebulous. However, say in real life (and one could definitely argue that this isn’t, but regardless, there are real people out there behind the screens), that sort of behavior would either get someone arrested or fired or both. How that can not be jerkish is a mystery to me.
Perhaps I didn’t explain myself well (which isn’t unusual), but what I was going for is how you have one ‘system,’ in which there’s favoritism. In the other, you have the extreme opposite… this person is so (awful/idiotic/whatever) ________, that we have to allow them to continue in their usual manner lest we be accused of not being fair. Does that make any better sense? Further more, I’m not complaining about the moderation of the board at all. It must be incredibly difficult, especially in situations like this, and all I’d like is to grasp where they’re coming from, certainly in light of what I’ve stated.
This is an old argument, and one which fails simply because this is not the real world. People who come to the Dope should not expect to be given a philosophical pass. All is fair game.
I see what you’re thinking here, but the premise is flawed. There is no universal agreement on whether his behavior is awful/idiotic/whatever.
Also I would like add that those who are describing my behavior as all that stuff, come from a group from whom a disproportionate number who are “self admittedly” (as that term is being used most frequently at this time) irrational.
PS. Thanks for the kind words Ogre.
I totally agree. Honestly, I am amazed that on a board that promises to fight ignorance that religion could be debated at all. But it is not the topic, but the jerkish nature of that debate that is being argued, IMHO.
Not suggesting that there is. It is the last 5 years or so of mod moderating that I base my expectation on.
Hey, I just brainstormed! Maybe we should ban all the posters who have admitted to getting arrested or fired. Also, the people who WOULD be fired if we sent their boss a link. Obviously, in real life, they are jerks. Who wants them around here?!