He wasn’t calling you a liar.
After I said the subject needed to be dropped, he posted about it once (and he was composing that post at the same time as my instruction).
It’s not a newbie thing.
It’s condescending, but it’s not an insult (yeah, it’s an extremely fine line). I can say, “way to go, Einstein”, and have it drip with sarcasm - but it’s still not an insult. But if I say “way to go, moron”, it’s an insult.
At no point in that thread did CandidGamera call you a liar. It looks like you’re building a habit of reading way too far into things, and putting words in people’s mouths. Again, that’s what’s getting you in trouble. Argue the post, not the poster - this will help immensely in not rushing to conclusions that aren’t being made.
At this point, I’d strongly suggest that if you run across a thread where the tone of the OP seems to be hostile against you, you just not participate. Other than the Pit, I can’t imagine any thread starting out hostile against me.
Actually, newbies generally get the benefit of the doubt around here; I’m much more likely to give a mod note instead of a warning to a newbie on the assumption that they are not yet familiar with our rules. On the other hand, newbies who continue to violate the rules once they have been clearly explained (and explained at length) to them are not going to have the opportunity to become veteran posters, so there is a kind of self-selection at work.
Actually, that’s not true. Post 133 was 6 hours after the mod note. And you could make an argument that all the subsequent “medical anomaly” follow-ups were part of that entire line of discussion.
Look at the thread again, you made a post addressed to Dio where you posted a whole page worth of hijack on polygamy 4 hours after the mod note, prefaced with “Marley, I’m not trying to derail the thread”. Now look at Dio’s response to your post, Dio didn’t respond to any of that part of your post. None of it. So no, you don’t get to claim that “he did it too”.
Your spin of the thread is not helping your cause. There were two mod notes telling you (and a few other people) to cool it on the personal insults, the other people heeded the notes, but instead you ramped it up with the liar and stupid comment. There was a mod note telling people to stop the polygamy hijack, you ignored it and kept on posting about polygamy. In both cases you included in your posts that you weren’t calling someone a liar and you weren’t hijacking, yet that is exactly what you did. The mods are telling you that behaviour isn’t acceptable. What else do you need to understand that you are violating the rules?
I would say those were a separate part of the discussion about “anomalies” and reproduction. I see now that he did mention polygamy at the end of the post. That’s not what I wanted, but at least the discussion of whether or not polygamy was similar to homosexuality, whether it was “immature,” natural legal, or even exists was moved into a different thread.
Perhaps you see double standards because you keep imposing your interpretation on words that do not actually say what you later claim they say.
I have just reviewed every PM I have sent to you and I do not even find the word “bigot” in any of them–not even posted by you claiming I have laid that charge against you. Certainly, nothing I sent can be remotely construed as accusing you of bigotry. I was not particularly happy with the way that you persisted in keeping alive an acrimonious squabble about racism because I could see that multiple posters were using the word “race” in different meanings and you kept attacking them without taking the time or making the effort to discover how they were using the word, but while I accused you of ignorance and hostility, I never claimed you were bigoted.
The same thing happened in my Mod note that you have quoted in this thread. I pointed out how YogSosoth addressed your statements. When you responded, you introduced the word “homophobic” that he had not used. When he replied, he simply used the word that you had introduced, while continuing to address your words rather than making any comment about you.
As a relative newbie (or at least for the period when I was completely new) I can definitely say that this is not true. I never felt any harassment or condescension. The people here (mods included) are quite welcoming.
But newbies are far more likely to misunderstand the rules and the nature of a board’s discourse, and thus make trouble for themselves.
CitizenPained,
I’m mostly a lurker but I’ve been a member for a number of years so I have a good idea of how the community works here.
When you first started posting I was kinda happy because it’s nice to have active posters but then you kept posting and posting and posting…
Just yesterday, I opened a thread and I saw you had posted in it and I didn’t want to read it specifically because you were posting in it. Can I point to specific instances? No. But your name is easy to remember and I’m starting to shy away from threads you post in. IMO currently, your tone is wrong for this board.
I’m not trying to be insulting, this is just evidence that maybe its you and not the other posters. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but if I you’re liked less than Dio you might think about changing your ways instead of sea lawyering (heh it’s been years since I’ve used sea lawyer) the mods.
I think that calling me Newt in that context is calling me a liar, kind of like ‘Einstein’ is like staying ‘stupid’.
But if I am that disliked, Turbo, I’ll leave. Not that you saying that you avoid threads I’m in was insulting or anything.
Being called a liar is being called a liar. Being called Newt is being called Newt. This is not a fine distinction. Either way, Newt wasn’t lying in the instance being referred to with that analogy - he was just making a really stupid nonsense backpedaling statement. There is a difference between these statements: “You’re a liar”, “you’re lying”, “your statement is a lie” and “you’re backpedaling”. One is an insult, one is in a grey area, and two are not insults at all. (“You’re lying” has been on both sides of the fence on this board - I suggest you avoid it.) Being called Einstein may be *like *being called stupid, but it’s not *actually *being called stupid.
I see from tom’s post that you are, in fact, putting a whole lot of words in a whole lot of people’s mouths. This is not a good habit to have on this board. I’m not a mod - but I will say that it seems to me as a third party poster who’s never interacted with you outside of this thread, that you seem to be inordinately argumentative, and aggressively pursue what you think posters mean rather than what they actually say. You said you think you’re a good debater - but these are not good debating tactics, and will fail every time. In fact, they will (and have) get you in trouble.
Like I said - I’ve never interacted with you outside of this thread. Why would I vote either way? I’ve offered you my two (or three) cents, and qualified it as an objective perspective. If you want to take the advice, take it. If you don’t, then get banned. Why leave it up to a poll? So you can go out on your own terms? It’s not really your own terms if you’re letting everyone else decide your fate.
I really didn’t think I was that awful. I’ve never been pitted, and Capitaine is the only one that’s complained about me in ATMB.
But if I am that bad, I should go. Why stay in a place that you can’t contribute to? That’s just not my way of doing things. shrug I think it’s perfectly fair.
Again with the words in the mouth. Where did I say you were awful?!? Seriously - explain to me how you came to that conclusion.
Munch: that you seem to be inordinately argumentative
There are plenty of people on these boards I would describe that way, none of whom I’d describe as “awful”. Drop the martyr act, and address the advice that plenty of other people have been giving you - if you only take it introspectively. If YOU don’t feel you fit in or that the rules are too restrictive for you, then the SDMB may not be a great fit. But you’ve spent a tremendous amount of effort here in a short amount of time. Certainly you have some personal investment, and have found some element in these boards that resonates with you. It’s your call at this point - leaving it in the hands of other people is a pretty cowardly* way out.
*See? I didn’t call you a coward - that’s an insult. I called your actions cowardly. *That *is the distinction. And the reason is because you’re not a coward, but your current actions/statements are betraying that pattern.
To be argumentative without restraint or reason is, to me, awful. That was my opinion. You may call me cowardly. That’s fine. I’m going to safely exit the thread now.
Not only did I not call you cowardly, I went out of my way to point that out to you. Good luck in the future, I’m done here.
Perhaps so but it’s easily fixable and I would think anyone who wants to hold conversations would certainly want to try to fix it. Assuming it’s true, how exactly does leaving improve the situation? You’ll just be argumentative without restraint or reason to other people. Again, assuming your first sentence is true which I don’t necessarily agree with.