Why sometimes Warnings versus warnings?

I got an Official Warning for a ‘political snipe’ - forgot I was in GQ for one, and forgot that sniping at your own candidate is still a snipe. But why was I the only one? It’s not like my comment went unnoticed - it was responded to, and heartily - so why just me with the Warning? And why Big W Warning, anyway? Most people would just a mod nudge for that. I’ve seen people namecall and get a nudge.

Obama attends expensive dinners and much of the cash goes to the DNC (who happily take large bundle contributions and PAC cash, which, in turn, helps fund his campaign. They have a whole staff dedicated for that purpose, blah, blah. That’s known.

Can’t help but to think I’m still on the mod’s radar. My last Warning that resulted in a ban was from telling Dio that he was on ignore from now on. A rule that was rather buried, but anyway.

I wasn’t the mod who warned you, but I’ll give you my opinion(for what that’s worth).

When you get pulled over for speeding, sometimes you get a ticket. Once in a while, you get off with a warning. You get a ticket, but there were speeders passing you, but you got the ticket.

Might depend on what the mod had to eat that day, what kind of day he/she was having. Maybe a pet peeve of the mod was violated.

None of this is specific to the warning you got. My suggestion is to let it pass. We really don’t tend to pick on someone unless they’re a constant problem. I don’t see this as evidence of you being a constant problem. The Dio thing was way more complicated and invloved.

This one is a one off. Not as bad as calling someone an asshole out of the Pit.

Go and sin no more(or at least, if you gotta sin, keep it low level). :smiley:

This is one of those, “Damn it, if I knew I was breaking the rules, I’d break them harder!”


I’m also not the one who warned you, but as a GQ mod I’ll offer my opinion as well.

I see quite a difference between your post, and that of md2000. Your post was simply a jab directed at a political figure. You gave your opinion without making any real factual contribution to the thread. This is exactly the kind of post that is likely to elicit retaliation in kind from those who have other opinions, which is why we prohibit them in GQ.

md2000’s post, while containing some opinion, gave a substantial discussion about the basis for it. It wasn’t just a snarky throw-away line. I might, however, have suggested to him that his remarks were getting a bit personal about you, if, of course, you had bothered to report it.

Without specifics, it is impossible to address a complaint like this. As samclem suggests, situations may not be comparable (as in the case of your and md2000’s posts in the thread in question).

I would suggest that you stop trying to attribute your warnings to bias against you here. You did this very vociferously in your conflict with Dio, one that resulted in you both being suspended for a month. It would be a good idea that you think twice - and, considering your history - probably three or four times about your posts before you hit the submit button. You’re not being warned because we’re out to get you - you’re being warned because you’re not learning from your previous mistakes.

I didn’t report MD2000’s insult because a mod had already Warned me. I had completely forgotten about the thread.

I’m reporting him now. Is that allowed?

I am the hall monitor – er moderator – who warned you (sorry, old joke). I think Sam and Colibri summed things up well. I’m not targeting you and I’ve never issued you a warning (or mod note) in the past. Nothing personal.

Sometimes the reason a post gets a warning as opposed to a mod note is because the thread seems to be cruising for trouble. Like the speeders Sam alluded to, the best way to put things back on track is often to find the most egregious post and issue a warning, which gets everyone to back off a bit.

You may report a post at any time, although it’s often unwise to announce that you’ve done so. Although MD2000 was pretty close to the line for GQ, I didn’t think that post is worthy of a warning.

I had actually considered tossing the thread over to either the Elections forum or Great Debates when I first saw it, but I was hoping it would remain GQ. It seems to be okay right now if everyone remembers where it is.

So personal insults were allowed but not political jabs to a person who is not even on SDMB.



If it’s “unwise”, then why doesn’t anyone get called on for saying “reported” all the time?

Usually when you see “reported,” it’s in reference to spam, which is fine – it let’s others know that the mods have been alerted.

There was a recent thread about this in ATMB.

As Twix said, it’s fine when you’re talking about spam. When you’re in the midst of an argument and you say “I reported that!” it tends to escalate the argument.

Dude, random political jabs in GQ are incredibly annoying. You really think what you posted was ok?

And, yeah, people probably shouldn’t have responded, but feeding the troll is practically a pastime around here. (*)

(*) FWIW, I’m not saying you’re a troll, but that post was trolling.

Expanding what other mods have said: the reason for posting “reported” on spam is so that others know it’s already reported. Otherwise, we get ten or twelve reports on the same spam post, which clogs the motorways.

CitizenPained, your post was exactly the kind of post that the rule about political snipes in GQ was implemented to stop. It did not address the question, and it stirred up more political sniping. Yours was the strongest, and it was the trigger for the others. Of course you caught a Warning.

As for md2000, while his comment was a bit personal, to me it doesn’t violate the insult rule.

  1. Saying that “you sound naive,” while critical of your opinion, doesn’t IMO cross the line into being a personal insult.

  2. The rule against political jabs has nothing at all to do with the rule prohibiting personal insults, so I have no idea why you are linking them. Political jabs by their nature will often be about politicians, who of course will not be on the SDMB. We’re not really concerned about Obama feeling offended by your post.

  3. The interchange itself indicates why we don’t allow political jabs - they invite other posters to respond to the jab rather than directly to the subject of the thread, and hence can lead to a hijack.

I wasn’t aware that calling somoene a troll, then saying they’re acting like a troll was allowed.


I’m not calling you a jerk, I’m just saying you’re acting like a jerk for not reading the OP. That’s the exact same thing.

You sound remarkably naive about politics for someone throwing opinions around.

*Here’s a news flash *

*If you have a better idea, occupy a park *

Yeah, that was in noooo way insulting. Once again, a case of favorites and the unwanted child. If I had made a jab at Buchanan, I’m sure I would have gotten a Mod Note instead of a Warning. But that’s the way it works here. Since things are so subjective, you can bend them to your liking.

A mod if free to tell me if I’m out of line here, but I stand by what I said. That post, regardless of the forum you thought it was going in, was a pointless snipe meant to rile people up and get a response.

I read the OP. You presumably thought you were posting in The Pit. Fine. Doesn’t explain this thread. You don’t seem to realize you were out-of-line, even if unintentionally. If you did, you’d take your lumps instead of whining in this thread.


The man’s been dead for 143 years. Hasn’t he suffered enough?


Oh dear lord. I said I didn’t realize where I was, but noo…insult and name-call.

Not sure if this was directed at me, but if so, you completely missed the point. You posted something inappropriate to GQ and got warned. You say you forgot it was GQ. Fine, it happens. But this thread is basically you complaining that you got warned for breaking the rules, which you admit you’ve done. I think you’re being a bit of a crybaby for whining about it, and also for whining that there’s some sort of mod conspiracy out to get you. To this point, it is immaterial whether or not you realized you were in GQ when you made the original comment.