Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
There’s a third alternative, no? Your regular commitment of the false dichotomy fallacy (and numerous others) definitely don’t do much for the value here, IMO.
Keiths, can you try to stop indulging in your emotions.
You forget Neil, that keiths does all this for the benefit not only of this site, but mankind as a whole. As he’s reminded us, he’s been as busy as a one-armed paper hanger cleaning up the puke for the good citizens here.
It’s a shit job, protecting truth and justice by insulting others, but I suppose somebody has to do it.
Neil,
I’m not. Unlike Alan, I can remain rational despite my emotions.
Alan says he “owns” his emotions. The truth is that they own him, and that’s precisely the problem.
Molto impressivo!!
Hear, hear. Even if keiths were entirely correct about every disagreement with Alan’s moderation calls, Alan’s net value to TSZ is extremely high.
Plus, Neil doesn’t get enough grief about the stuff he moves to Guano. I need Alan to make me look somewhat less bad.
walto,
Why is that impressive? I think most people can manage it better than Alan. Or you.
It’s the same problem — being hijacked by emotion — that leads Alan to his poor moderation decisions and his dishonesty, and you to the false accusations that you make but then embarrassingly cannot back up.
(Recent example here.)
While I’m in this thread, let’s talk about something truly controversial: markdown
While it’s possible to use HTML in posts and comments here, it’s error prone even for people who have used it extensively. There are a couple of plugins that allow markdown as an alternative. Markdown is a much simpler syntax:
*Italics*
_Also italics_
**Bold**
__Also bold__
#Heading level 1
##Heading level 2
###Heading level 3
####Heading level 4
* First bulleted item
* Second bulleted item
* Third bulleted item
1. First numbered item
2. Second numbered item
3. Third numbered item
1. First numbered item
* Indented bulleted item
* Second indented bulleted item
2. Second numbered item
3. Third numbered item
[Link text](http://www.host.com/link.html “Link description”)
>This is a block quote.
If there’s any interest, I’ll ask Lizzie if she minds testing it out.
Patrick,
Well, there’s no doubt that you look far better when compared to Alan. You aren’t continually inventing new and unnecessary rules, and you actually ask yourself if a comment belongs in Guano before moving it there.
You do your job, in other words, and you don’t abuse your power as moderator.
If only we could persuade Alan to do the same.
As a rule I ignore posts on moderation issues. I didn’t think much of the childish whining when mung and phoodoo were the prime complainers, and I don’t think much of whining period.
The whole right column is nearly filled with worthless shit. I wish I could persuade people to grow up.
petrushka,
And yet here you are, whining about comments you don’t like.
So, whaddaya think of markdown?
LOL
Alan made a mistake. You pointed that out. Alan agreed to correct it. The issue should have been over at that point.
Instead, you ranted on for several posts. You were hijacked by emotion. And apparently, you are incapable of seeing that in yourself.
I see no advantage over html, assuming html isn’t disabled.
The claim was that your post was directed at the poster.
My comment may have been stupid, it may have been false. Even if it is either one or both it does not follow that you were not addressing the poster rather than the post.
It’s that whole how to be logical thing that you struggle with so much.
From the rules:
Feel free to pretend you were not addressing yourself to some perceived failing on my part.
Mung, you’re better off saying nothing than saying something stupid and false.
Posts are not better off saying nothing. Posts do not say stupid and false things. It’s clearly directed at me. Alan was nice to you. He probably didn’t want to hear post after post from you about how he fails to meet your standards for a moderator. Again.
Oh please don’t be modest. The extremely talented have to learn to expect and accept compliments for their awesomeness!
You got that right! It clearly was breaking the rules.
Patrick, are there different flavors of markdown or is it pretty much standard, like html? I often muck things up with the left and right arrows, markdown could help with that.
OMG. How many times have you bragged on this thread about your lack of interest in posts on this thread? Is somebody making you do this?
Mung,
Lizzie has made it absolutely clear that comments are fair game.
You made a stupid and false comment, and I pointed that out. True, the fact that you made a stupid and false comment does not reflect well on you, but that’s your problem. It does not transform my comment into a rule violation. The solution to the problem is for you to stop making stupid and false comments.
And no, pointing out that you are “better off saying nothing rather than saying something stupid and false” is not a rule violation. It’s true and it applies to everyone here.
Lastly, why be such a hypocrite? You clearly don’t give a damn about the rules when you’re composing your own comments, so complaining about others’ perceived violations is just hypocrisy.
I hate it when anyone puts anyone down or calls anyone names, you stupid bastards.
Glen Davidson
It’s pretty standardized. WordPress and GitHub have slight variants around formatting code, but the usual text formatting is very standard. No more missed closing brackets is a big benefit.
My only concern would be making sure it works with our LaTeX plugin.
YES! Let us seek to lift people up (stupid bastards that they are).
So? Your comment was directed at me. The first thing that gave it away was starting your sentence with Mung, …
Then you could say “that statement is stupid and false.” But that’s not what you wrote.
Don’t go getting all emotional on us.
Sure I address the poster. I do it all the time. I think if you’re going to do it I can do it too. But then I don’t go around beseeching the moderators to rescue my comment from Guano and denying that I was addressing the poster.
I’m a better class of hypocrite, clearly.
😀
Mung,
Don’t play dumb, Mung. Even you are bright enough to recognize that a comment beginning with someone’s name does not thereby constitute a rule violation.
Getting all emotional seems to make you see things that aren’t there.
Prase de lard.
GlenDavidson,
To quote the late great TL:
I’m sure we all agree that we ought to love one another and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that.
Here’s a song about National Brotherhood Week.
Neil,
It would have been over at that point if Alan had simply accepted full responsibility and fixed his mistake. Instead, he made excuses for himself and tried to shift some of the blame to me.
My comment was clearly within the rules. Alan screwed up by moving it to Guano. It was his mistake, and only his.
This is not an excuse:
My comment was not “on the edge of rule-breaking”. It clearly and obviously does not violate the rules, as anyone can see by simply considering the rules and then reading my comment.
Nor is this an excuse:
As I said earlier:
Alan’s excuse-making is so compulsive that he actually argued this:
There you have it. Alan “gave no specific undertakings”, so don’t expect him to do the job he accepted.
We need a moderator who will do his job instead of making excuses for why he can’t, or won’t, do it.
Neil:
You’re not grasping what it means to be hijacked by emotion. Alan got emotional and in the heat of the moment, moved a non-rule-violating comment to Guano. He screwed up because of his emotions.
I haven’t had to retract any statements or undo any actions taken in the heat of the moment, for the simple reason that I wasn’t hijacked by emotion. One can experience emotion and accept it without allowing oneself to be hijacked by it. It’s a skill that Alan, walto, and Mung would be well advised to develop.
You are absolutely without peers in your awesomeness. It is so true that you have never “had to retract any statements or undo any actions”. Bravo!
It is my current prediction that you will never retract any statements or undo any actions. Ever.
No keiths, your comment WAS sailing close to the wind (which I admire btw: I like to think I’m something of a practitioner myself. Heh.)
“That comment was stupid and false” clearly within the rules.
“Mung, you’re better off…” problematic: addressing the poster.
Let’s check DNA_Jock’s patented stochastic enforcement scorecard:
1 Clearly breaks rules vs. may be interpreted as rule-breaking. 0
2 Guanoing requested vs. Target requests post not be guanoed 0.5 (requested-by-implication, post-hoc, I believe)
3 Author perceived to be “home” side vs. Author perceived to be “visitor” 1
4 Target perceived to be “visitor” vs. Target is an admin 1
5 Substantive content is low vs. Substantive content is high 1
6 Derailing active discussion vs. ancient bloody history. 0.75 de-rail not started by keiths
Scores a 4.25 out of 6.
Patrick and walto, I think it only fair to warn you that keiths’s sardony detection circuits are demonstrably fried. Ease up a mite, okay?
When’s the straw poll?
Crap!
Did not see that one coming!
Entire array of electronics blown out!
It’s cool, I think he might actually believe I’m praising him!
walto,
Except that I have — just not for reasons of emotional hijacking.
Another false walto claim falls flat.
Ah, I think you’re just being overly modest again.
C’mon, keiths, if you got it, FLAUNT IT!
walto,
If “overly modest” means “truthful”, then yes, I am. Why not give it a try, walto?
“Overly modest” doesn’t mean truthful!! You should look it up!
And, like I said, you have to learn to take credit for your greatness. Don’t hide that light under a bushel, keiths!
ETA: Also, I just want to add that I think it’s a little unfair for you to expect guys like me and mung and Alan and any of the other shitheads around here to be like you is expecting an awful lot. Always just and truthful. Never emotional. Never needing to retract anything. That’s a high bar, man! I mean we can try, but….Jesus!!!
Well, you were the one who accused me of ” saying something stupid and false.” So perhaps you are partly to blame. Forget that. Totally to blame. You should be thanking Alan.
Would you agree with me that self-deception is not healthy?
LoL. There’s a difference between emotion and intoxication. I’ll assume you’re not posting drunk.
Mung,
Of course, because what you said was both stupid and false:
…and pointing out that a statement is stupid and false is completely within the rules.
Where did you get the bizarre idea that I thought all circles were identical, by the way?
walto:
I have faith in you, walto. (Not a lot, but some.) I’ve seen that when you’re not feeling threatened and insecure, you’re often capable of carrying on a reasoned, honest, and intelligent conversation.
The lies tend to happen when you’re upset. Meditation helps a lot of people manage their emotions better. You’ve written a book on the topic. Why not take up a serious meditation practice? One that stresses awareness as well as concentration?
People who get swept away by emotions are often unaware of how irrational they’ve become until after the fact. (Think of your various false accusations, and the embarrassing aftermath when you can’t support them.) The right kind of meditation practice can help you to become aware of emotions as they are building, before they sweep you away. You then have the option of responding rationally instead of shitheadedly.
“late great”? Fortunately, Prof. Lehrer is not dead yet.
It’s really not right for you to be giving therapy away free like this, keiths! You’re going to get into trouble from those trying to protect the people (mostly dunces probably) who provide so much less value and then charge a lot for it! I know that this kind of generosity is just part of your make-up and so it’s hard for you to, I guess you could say, cork it (though that doesn’t sound very nice!), but I’m only thinking of what the various professional societies and other rent-seekers might say when they see posts like yours.
And also, maybe we should think of struggling, possibly fresh out of school, therapists who need the work. Some are probably having babies and maybe looking for housing. How will they manage to make a living if those with twice (probably really more like eight times, but I don’t want to be mean) their skills are letting it all hang out for nothing the way you do over and over again?!
But, on the other hand, fuck them. Sometimes good things just happen to bad people, right? I think it’s best if I just thank my lucky stars that you’re you and hope your generosity is as dependable as your lack of emotion, truthfulness, proofs, evidence, brilliance, rock-solidity, real arguments, non-puke-aversion, and all the other stuff I’m probably forgetting now, so maybe you could link to them. I mean when you get a chance.
So, thanks, man. Like I keep saying, you’re the awesomest!
cubist,
OMG! I feel awful. I don’ t know where I got that idea from. Glad to know that he’s still alive.
walto,
I don’t claim to be perfect, or “the awesomest”, but I do seem to be better at managing emotions than you are. I also don’t share your chronic problems with dishonesty.
It’s interesting how often (and conveniently) you devalue the things you’re bad at. You have problems supporting your arguments, so you speak disparagingly of evidence. You have problems with dishonesty, so you devalue truthfulness, speaking disparagingly of “truth, justice, and the American way!”.
It doesn’t follow that they’re unimportant. Honesty matters, and evidence matters, even if you suck at both, walto.
DNA_Jock,
No, not problematic. Giving advice is not against the rules, and though my sentence implied that I thought Mung’s statement was stupid and false, that is also not against the rules, nor is it “sailing close to the wind”.
LoL. We should enumerate the keiths ways to “sail close to the wind.”
Couch your attack on the person in terms of giving advice. keiths, some advice, don’t be an ass. No one likes an ass. See, no rules broken.
Actually, you admitted that you were accusing me, and that therefore you were addressing the poster.
Mung,
This isn’t that hard.
“Don’t be an ass” violates the rules because it implies that someone is being an ass.
“You’re better off saying nothing than saying something stupid and false” does not violate the rules because it only implies that someone said something stupid and false. It doesn’t necessarily imply that the person in question is stupid and dishonest, though he might be.
The rules haven’t worked very well, of course, and I think we would be better off without them. In particular, they give cover to people like you who want to behave dishonestly without getting called on it. That’s a bad thing. Plus, things have gone more smoothly at TSZ when moderation has been minimal.
But if the moderators are going to Guano comments at all, they should do so within the rules and not according to personal whim. Alan needs to get into the (frikkin’ obvious) habit of determining whether comments violate the rules before Guanoing them.