Rule clarification

[Jeff Lebowski]

This place is beginning to look a lot like CG before it's demise.

You have been saying that since the day we started. You need some new material.

[DU Ute]

John, can I call you that? Other than Johnny Carson and Cash I have always felt like anyone over the age of 12 should drop the second n and y. Anyways, I like you and think you bring an interesting perspective to this board. However, this seems to be another example of you wanting to kick against the pricks, no pun intended. The reason I feel this way is because I use to do the same thing on CB. I argued and boardmailed Jefe and Bernard with almost the exact same points you made. Yet ultimately, I knew my history didn't always allow me the say leeway as favored posters such as Niku or Aussie.

You beat me to it! Looks like I'm not the only one who thinks this about DDD! LOL!!!!

[Fiyero]

This place is beginning to look a lot like CG before it's demise.

Johnny Lingo is about to start his own board and he's taking jlingo, Lingo II Electric Boogaloo, Fellowship of the Lingo, Johnny Lingo and the Crypt of Speakeasys, Lingo's Eleven, and the Chronicles of Lingo with him. That'll show everyone.

[wuapinmon]

Spare me the lecture, wuap. After your cleverly disguised F*** YOU a couple weeks ago, you have zero room to talk about playing nice.

It wasn't cleverly disguised. It was patently obvious; even falawful got it.

[RobinFinderson]

I don't understand the need for a rules clarification. The current rules state that we don't threaten and verbally abuse each other. That seems simple enough. It doesn't take long to figure out the difference between kidding around and verbal abuse. My understanding is that the post that earned the suspension was one of a number of similar personal attacks that were clearly unwanted. Where is the vagueness in that?

[TripletDaddy]

Oh, Johnny Lingo! It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks!

(For those who didn't pick up on it, I just implied DDD is a prick! Ha! )

You are several years and about 2 message boards too late on that observation.

[JohnnyLingo]

Johnny Lingo is about to start his own board and he's taking jlingo, Lingo II Electric Boogaloo, Fellowship of the Lingo, Johnny Lingo and the Crypt of Speakeasys, Lingo's Eleven, and the Chronicles of Lingo with him. That'll show everyone.

Nah.

It wasn't cleverly disguised. It was patently obvious; even falawful got it.

Fair enough.

Your moral standing on this issue remains poor.

I don't understand the need for a rules clarification. The current rules state that we don't threaten and verbally abuse each other. That seems simple enough. It doesn't take long to figure out the difference between kidding around and verbal abuse. My understanding is that the post that earned the suspension was one of a number of similar personal attacks that were clearly unwanted. Where is the vagueness in that?

When every preceding attack between the two posters had been allowed and then suddenly one is considering suspension-worthy, without any prior indication that this would be the case.

That's where the vagueness is.

[tooblue]

You have been saying that since the day we started. You need some new material.

No, actually I haven't ... but it's pretty pathetic that threads like these seem to be the only source of excitement or entertainment on this board lately isn't it? To borrow from the board vernacular 'speaks volumes'.

Oh, and by the way it'd be a lie if I didn't state that I have some concern about the way the board is moderated but generally I don't have a problem with the way the board is run. However, to be blunt, while you might consider yourself a moderate, the reality is you and Dan and some others are my-way or high-way personalities. Which makes you something other than moderate and it leaves little room for the Harry Reids to fully participate.

Sincerly, the board martyr

[DU Ute]

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/nar...sorder/DS00652

Good point. 95% of the posters here wouldn't have noticed a 24 hour period with no Lingo posts if he would have silently taken his lumps, learned a lesson from his day off, and continued posting here without dredging this incident up. He did something mean spirited and paid a small price for it. Everything since then has just been narcissistic preening.

[JohnnyLingo]

Good point. 95% of the posters here wouldn't have noticed a 24 hour period with no Lingo posts if he would have silently taken his lumps, learned a lesson from his day off, and continued posting here without dredging this incident up. He did something mean spirited and paid a small price for it. Everything since then has just been narcissistic preening.

The free psychological evaluations here lately have been nice, but in another context, it may be considered rude to speak to someone's mental health.

[TripletDaddy]

No, actually I haven't ... but it's pretty pathetic that threads like these seem to be the only source of excitement or entertainment on this board lately isn't it? To borrow from the board vernacular 'speaks volumes'.

Oh, and by the way it'd be a lie if I didn't state that I have some concern about the way the board is moderated but generally I don't have a problem with the way the board is run. However, to be blunt, while you might consider yourself a moderate, the reality is you and Dan and some others are my-way or high-way personalities. Which makes you something other than moderate and it leaves little room for the Harry Reids to fully participate.

Sincerly, the board martyr

In my experience, JeffLebowski lets it play out and is not heavy handed. I say this as a non-EC member and as a non-mod.

this johnnylingo thing is a perfect example. I am pretty transparent in my desire to simply chop off the heads of those that, by consensus, add almost nothing to this site (who are, admittedly, extremely few in number). If it were me, I would have shown these few folks the door and taken away the key. Again, this is my personal opinion. Nobody has lobbied harder on behalf of those limited few than the EC....guys like JeffLebowski.

ps pelagius and UtahDan are batsh*t crazy insane, on the other hand. I will give you that.

[RobinFinderson]

When every preceding attack between the two posters had been allowed and then suddenly one is considering suspension-worthy, without any prior indication that this would be the case.

That's where the vagueness is.

People on this board are often surprisingly mean. I can't figure out why anyone would tell others to eff off, or that they aren't generally liked here. Meanness, apparently, isn't against the rules. I think that there is a stark and obvious difference between those examples of meanness and an attempt to make someone feel bad about their body. When I found out what got you the ban, I ended up thinking that the suspension was a lot shorter than what I would have given (if I were the Judge Dredd type).

[Pheidippides]

The free psychological evaluations here lately have been nice, but in another context, it may be considered rude to speak to someone's mental health.

That is true. Maybe it is over the line, even. I don't know because I am but one person who only has a sense of my own thoughts. Clearly I did not think it was over the line because I posted it.

But I do know that I trust the members of the EC enough that if they tell me they would appreciate it if I didn't do that again, and would I mind taking a day off as a penalty, that I'll abide by their judgment without further comment. I consider them my friends and am happy to submit to their consensus.

[TripletDaddy]

People on this board are often surprisingly mean. I can't figure out why anyone would tell others to eff off, or that they aren't generally liked here. Meanness, apparently, isn't against the rules. I think that there is a stark and obvious difference between those examples of meanness and an attempt to make someone feel bad about their body. When I found out what got you the ban, I ended up thinking that the suspension was a lot shorter than what I would have given (if I were the Judge Dredd type).

I share because people wonder aloud why things are the way they are. So I tell them. If folks would cease from starting threads dedicated to why they are being treated a certain way, I probably wouldn't bring it up.

[JohnnyLingo]

That is true. Maybe it is over the line, even. I don't know because I am but one person who only has a sense of my own thoughts. Clearly I did not think it was over the line because I posted it.

But I do know that I trust the members of the EC enough that if they tell me they would appreciate it if I didn't do that again, and would I mind taking a day off as a penalty, that I'll abide by their judgment without further comment. I consider them my friends and am happy to submit to their consensus.

You're a good man, Charlie Brown. You've come a long way from your early days on CB.