Yo, Czarcasm-what's the problem?

The BBQ Pit
61

[QUOTE=Inner Stickler]
So, have there been a lot of reported posts and emails from other members complaining about these unattended threads, or is this coming from the Pitting a few weeks ago or are you mods just bored? Because, speaking for myself, I don’t care if someone doesn’t feel like participating in their threads. I simply don’t feel the need to participate in theirs. No modding necessary.

(I’m becoming more and more sure that modding should be restricted to moving threads to the right forum, dealing with personal attacks, and banning socks. I’m getting tired of this “The thread was too stupid to live” crap. I’ll decide that for myself thank you very much.)
[/QUOTE]

I see this kind of banning as the equivalent of my Gmail spam filter. Sure, there’s some entertainment to be found browsing through spam e-mail, but it’s sure as hell annoying when it lowers the signal-to-noise ratio of your actual mail.

62

[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat]

He now has a month to think about it.
[/QUOTE]

Or are you still being obtuse? :wink:

After further review, I will admit that I don’t know the whole ins and outs of this situation, so I will do a flip-flop here and withdraw my complaint.

You’re still 0 for 1 this month. :wink:

63

[QUOTE=Revtim]
It’s clear the mods get hard-on for somebody, then get hair-trigger on whatever subject got their panties twisted up.

Example: Anyone have experience buying from irotors? - In My Humble Opinion - Straight Dope Message Board
Czarcasm closes it for non-participation a mere hour after it was opened. Fucking ridiculous.
[/QUOTE]
That’s the one that made my jaw drop. They give the thread an hour, and it gets closed?
Fucking ridiculous.

64

Why doesn’t he have “suspended” under his name?

65

[QUOTE=BiblioCat]
That’s the one that made my jaw drop. They give the thread an hour, and it gets closed?
Fucking ridiculous.
[/QUOTE]
Here’s a reading assignment for BiblioCat-try reading the *rest * of this fucking thread.

66

Bite me. I did read the rest of the thread.
I was just commenting that seeing a thread get closed after an hour was pretty jerkish behavior. As other posters have mentioned, I don’t see the big deal about him not coming back into his threads. But what if other posters are enjoying the discussion going on in a certain thread?
Yeah, scrambledeggs was a jerk, I agree with that. To be perfectly honest, I hope he doesn’t come back after his suspension.

Furthermore, if you come back and add a simple “Thanks!” a thread, you are accused of post-padding or wasting bandwidth. I know there was a thread a while back that said thanking others was implied, and we weren’t to waste precious bandwidth. If you asked a question, read the answers and let it go. Og forbid we waste the freaking bandwidth.

67

I’m mildy curious. If everyone is so terrified of our mod superpowers, why does everyone feel so free to disagree with us and insult us?

68

[QUOTE=Frank]
I’m mildy curious. If everyone is so terrified of our mod superpowers, why does everyone feel so free to disagree with us and insult us?
[/QUOTE]
I dunno -maybe cause yo momma dresses you funny?

69

[QUOTE=Frank]
I’m mildy curious. If everyone is so terrified of our mod superpowers, why does everyone feel so free to disagree with us and insult us?
[/QUOTE]
What makes you think we’re all terrified of your Mod Superpowers?

If we were scared of you, we’d be agreeing with you like good little toadys, not questioning what seems to be arbitrary behavior.

70

[QUOTE=BiblioCat]
If we were scared of you, we’d be agreeing with you like good little toadys, not questioning what seems to be arbitrary behavior.
[/QUOTE]

If it’s so arbitrary, why are you still here? Should not you have been banned two posts ago?

71

[QUOTE=Frank]
If it’s so arbitrary, why are you still here? Should not you have been banned two posts ago?
[/QUOTE]

Well, there you go. As blatant an example of arbitrary non-banning as I’ve ever seen.
:smiley:

72

I don’t get the outrage amongst older SDMBers. I read a lot of Scrambled’s posts, and I participated in so few because it was obvious to me that a lot of his threads were based on conjecture, inflammatory language and an obvious desire to sow dissent.

I feel that it’s perfectly fine to put yourself out there like that, but in a place like this, you also should be prepared to defend your position, which **scrambled eggs ** rarely, if ever, did.

I’m new around here and I am familiar with most internet ettiquettes, but in a heavily-moderated board like this one, there are always going to be situations where “rules” and “laws” are skirted by a poster that will fall prey to a moderator.

This is one of those cases. I moderate a semi-popular football board, and besides the fact that assholes abound, there are always grey areas that mods/admin have to interpret for the sake of the internet community at large, and sometimes those decisions are not popular, but necessary.

**Scrambled Eggs ** was given ample time to adjust to the “way things are” here and failed to respond to nudging to do so.

The fact that some (only some!) of his threads inspired some honest debate is really irrelevant.

73

If you can’t answer that’s fine, but someone said he got really nasty when someone pmed him a warning-what exactly did he say, or what was the gist of it?

74

[QUOTE=BiblioCat]
If we were scared of you, we’d be agreeing with you like good little toadys, not questioning what seems to be arbitrary behavior.
[/QUOTE]
Now I’m the one getting curious, BiblioCat. Do you really feel that the suspension of scrambledeggs was arbitrary, even after reading Post #59 in this thread? The thread closure you’re so upset about is a very simple DNFTT move. There was a lot going on that you didn’t see, and the last thread scrambledeggs started was a blatant in-your-face “I’m ignoring all of your warnings and starting more threads” neener-neener move (that’s a technical term).

And, by the way, a “thanks, that answers my question” post is just fine. It lets everyone know that you got what you were looking for. Ignoring repeated requests for clarification and refusing to defend your position is at least jerkish behavior, if not flat-out trolling.

[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
If you can’t answer that’s fine, but someone said he got really nasty when someone pmed him a warning-what exactly did he say, or what was the gist of it?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think it would be appropriate for us to post his private messages or emails on the board. If he had wanted them to be public, he would have posted them publicly, and we try to respect everyone’s privacy.

75

'kay, that’s cool. I was just curious. I think we can assume, however, that the “controversial” thread, though, was the rape one. It’s safe to guess that-right?

76

[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat]
The thread closure you’re so upset about is a very simple DNFTT move. There was a lot going on that you didn’t see, and the last thread scrambledeggs started was a blatant in-your-face “I’m ignoring all of your warnings and starting more threads” neener-neener move (that’s a technical term).
[/QUOTE]
I’m not ‘so upset’ about the thread closure, I just saw that it had been closed within an hour of the original posting and thought it was kind of a knee-jerk reaction. Like I said, I agree the guy has been something of an ass, and obviously I don’t know what was going on in the private emails and PMs, but jeez… give the thread a chance.

77

[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
'kay, that’s cool. I was just curious. I think we can assume, however, that the “controversial” thread, though, was the rape one. It’s safe to guess that-right?
[/QUOTE]
Guin. Stop while you’re still behind. :slight_smile:

78

[QUOTE=BiblioCat]
I’m not ‘so upset’ about the thread closure, I just saw that it had been closed within an hour of the original posting and thought it was kind of a knee-jerk reaction. Like I said, I agree the guy has been something of an ass, and obviously I don’t know what was going on in the private emails and PMs, but jeez… give the thread a chance.
[/QUOTE]
What you “see” on the board, as a poster, and what is “going on” in the mod/Admin loop, can be quite different.

It’s not really up to the mods/Admins to post every little thought/email that goes through the loop as soon as it happens. scrambledeggs caught the attention of both mods and posters quite early in his/her career.

As I"ve posted before, you can be a returning poster/troll/sock, and if you post in a normal manner, hell, we probably won’t catch you. You don’t get reported, you don’t make waves, you don’t set off our spidey-senses. You just act like a normal cyberposter, and nobody gives a shit.

But, you start doing something outrageous, something very out of the normal, and you draw attention to yourself. Not that you can’t be redeemed, but if you don’t chose to answer some simple questions when asked, the way we assume(perhaps wrongly) a pretty standard poster would, then you raise a red flag. And, the mods/Admins, despite the minority opinion on this board, are pretty normal people/posters. We just can’t fathom(Hi, OPal) why posters go to such lengths to be so controversial. Sometimes, they’re trolling, and quite deliberately— sometimes they’re whackjobs from the internet who found us when Unca Cece said something about area 51 or 9/11.

If we had banned scrambledeggs, then we’re the thugs some of you thought we were. We didn’t. Hell, I"ve gotten enough warnings in a short period of time in the old days to have been suspended. But, life goes on for all concerned.

Hopefully, eggs comes back and simply reads emails/PMs. That would have forestalled all of this.