MetaChat - If anybody wants me, I'll be in time-out with my hubby.

I've kept my mouth shut all day, but now it's late enough that I no longer have the willpower to do so.

This is all quite a bit of drama for someone who really kind of had it coming. No matter how many times it was pointed out to jonmc that he repeatedly derailed threads and turned them into discussions about him -- about his feelings, about his (oft-repeated) opinions -- he didn't hear it.

Apparently, those who see him every day didn't hear it either.

But that doesn't mean that it wasn't a huge pain in the ass to lots of the rest of us.

I give taz a big kiss on the cheek, and I say Thank You.

Flame away, delete at will. Just let it be fucking over. It's really not all that interesting.

Meh.

posted by mudpuppie 24 January | 01:18

Enjoy your man on a fulltime basis while you can, pips.

posted by Doohickie 24 January | 01:41

I can't help but think that I totally missed something.

posted by interrobang 24 January | 03:07

Wait, what?

posted by brainwidth 24 January | 03:10

"He who misses the drama is doomed to watch others rehash it."

-- Confucius

posted by mudpuppie 24 January | 03:12

Is jonmc dead?

posted by interrobang 24 January | 03:15

To paraphrase my mother: He's not dead. He's just resting.

(But if he were dead, it would make Doohickie's comment all that more disturbing, no?)

posted by mudpuppie 24 January | 03:19

Your mother was in Monty Python?

posted by brainwidth 24 January | 03:22

Oh, sorry. Misquoted.

posted by mudpuppie 24 January | 03:26

Goodness me.

jon's on a time out. If you don't like that and you want to quit or go on time out with him, then I totally respect that. I don't like the fact that pips has gone on time-out with jon, I'm upset that we've lost a member over this, but I think it's nice that there's loyalty being demonstrated.

But steam rolling into a thread where people are talking about quitting smoking and effectively putting speed humps into that discussion is not a cool thing. Jon's been warned in the past about similar things. He's been threatened with time outs. This time he overstepped that mark again, and he's actually been put on that time out.

A few people are going to be pissed that we did what we did. A few people will approve. I welcome any input people have on the situation, but would ask that you try not to make it personal against either jon or us admins. I personally have a soft spot for the big galoot, and you should remember that he will be back soon.

posted by seanyboy 24 January | 03:33

And pips. I'll miss you lots.

posted by seanyboy 24 January | 03:34

I'll miss you, pips! :(

posted by By the Grace of God 24 January | 04:04

image

posted by weretable and the undead chairs 24 January | 04:07

*smokes one for jon*

See you soon, but for pete's sake, man, i'd be pissed if I was trying to quit, too!

posted by loquacious 24 January | 04:08

Wow, I didn't know--I thought the "time-out" meant that Pips was in there with her husband, love-making or something--and didn't even know that the husband in question was JonMC.
Hmmm, I'm sorry to have missed the drama, but I like Jon, and Pips, and Mudpuppies (that name is so cute), and Seanboy, and all yous god-dam motherfuckres--so I don't care who gets a time out, just make sure you're all back here in time for the fun, whenever that'll be...

posted by hadjiboy 24 January | 04:15

Sorry, pips; I understand your position, though.

As to jon, he's been warned privately in the most explicit terms, other people have complained to him on the site, and he was warned two different times in that thread and had ample time and space to stop. I hope he comes back, but if he takes over and floods threads he will get another time out. If he derails threads to turn them into something he would rather talk about, he will get another time out.

posted by taz 24 January | 04:16

Good decision. On jonmc, not by pips.

posted by asok 24 January | 05:04

I like jonmc, but he can be an overbearing pain in the arse - often to the detriment of the community. I also think this time-out is a good decision.

posted by dodgygeezer 24 January | 05:21

Wow. Do you promise that we'll get warnings before time-outs? Because I worry that I have a habit of posting comments that derail threads into topics about me, and I'd hate to be pissing people off this much without realising it.

posted by chrismear 24 January | 05:30

Shit, whoops.

posted by chrismear 24 January | 05:30

See! chrismear is now derailing this thread so it's now All About Him. Ban him! Ban him! Ban him!

posted by essexjan 24 January | 05:32

I would add that, much as I love jonmc, I agree with the time out, both in principle as it applies to all of us, and on this specific occasion.

posted by essexjan 24 January | 05:36

\* This thread makes mischief sad. ;-q *\

posted by mischief 24 January | 05:41

It makes me sad too, mischief. But the difference between the internet and the real world is that in real-life discussions, you can say "do you think you could just stop talking for one minute so someone else can speak?" (In fact, I believe I used those very words to jonmc in Vegas at one point).

But on teh intarwebs, it's easy for people to keep on and on and on.

MeCha is nobody's personal blog.

Sometimes people need to be told to shut up.

That includes me, so I'll do it now.

Except to say: chrismear - Ban him! Ban him! Ban him!

posted by essexjan 24 January | 05:48

I would like to say this: What's done is done, and whether you agree or disagree with the decision made, in both my personal opinion and without singling anyone out, perhaps this public forum is not the place to do that. I say this because I feel it is one-sided, as jonmc can't respond, and pips won't, and it has the potential to polarise the site, which is not what MeCha is really all about. There has already been one absolute stand taken against the decision, which is a shame, but I can definitely respect the principles involved. I would so very much hate to see more of that, as I'm sure we all would, and to see any ill-will generated about the opinions expressed and this site.

posted by Zack_Replica 24 January | 05:58

Did I miss something¿

You can get derailed if you choose to. You make the choice. If you ignore a comment not applicable to the topic, is that going to kill you¿ Must you react to it¿ Why¿

In any conversation, things move from one topic to another. If someone at say a party keeps jumping in when the topic hasn't ended, they'd be ignored. Some folks are like that.

My opinion on banning for 'derailment'.

posted by alicesshoe 24 January | 06:02

I think we should hire professional protesters for both sides.

posted by bigblueroom 24 January | 06:33

alicesshoe: In the Mecha/Mefi world people do not tend to "ignore" things very well. Perhaps it's a sign we're a relatively strong community (compared to others on the tubes).

I like to think that Metachat is more like a neighborhood dive bar than an internet forum--in this case, jonmc was a barfly that interrupted one to0 many conversations. Taz, seanyboy and the other admins are the barkeeps and sometimes they have to kick out one of the barflies for the evening (or two) to keep the others from finding a new place to hang. That's my take on it, anyway.

posted by mullacc 24 January | 06:51

I think we should hire professional protesters for both sides.

That would be easiest, no? Then we could all nip out together for a beer and let them alone to just have at it.

posted by loquacious 24 January | 06:52

mullacc,
The barfly analogy...don't know. Does the bartender accidentally spill something on the offending barfly. Do people move away from an offending barfly. Does someone get in the grill of the barfly¿

You could be right.

It reminds me of that beer commercial ]Keith's[, with this overbearing 'Scot' going on to a younger kid about him being mr. spilly beer. My initial reaction was that I'd tell him to STFU and don't bother the kid pissypants. Pick on someone your own size.

I have an issue with bully's and predators.

jon doesn't fit that description but I can understand that some may feel that way.
I look at his comments as asides. Harmless.

It's not my bar and the owners have every right to cut off a patron for unruly/offending behaviour.

Guess I'm saying the bar analogy is spot on. Not everyone can hold their drink before they turn into eedjits and everyone drags him outside for a Scottish handshake.

posted by alicesshoe 24 January | 07:14

[looks into this thread and immediately gets frightened and runs away]

posted by JanetLand 24 January | 08:22

I don't know about you all, but I am naked right now.

posted by Eideteker 24 January | 08:37

Oops, that last comment of mine was supposed to be posted before JanetLand's. Mods, hope please?

posted by Eideteker 24 January | 08:42

I'm with taz & seanyboy & dodgy (HI DODGY!!) - well done. And I was waiting for drama, and there has been, like, no drama, or very little, at least until eideteker got nekkid and we brought in the professional protesters (are they naked too?) and that right there is your basic classic drama like Macbeth interpreted by a Noh troupe: all good.

So with that taken care of, we can get back to the important stuff: WTF is a scottish handshake?

posted by mygothlaundry 24 January | 08:52

Pips, I understand how you feel, but the link to "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" was uncalled for. I think you owe taz an apology.

Come back, Joe Famous!

(Psst, Miss-I'm-so-meh-about-this-I've-had-to-hold-my-tongue-all-day, you're glee is showing.)

posted by danostuporstar 24 January | 08:53

You people are messing up my hair.

posted by chewatadistance 24 January | 09:10

Sigh.

posted by mike9322 24 January | 09:15

Double sigh.

posted by muddgirl 24 January | 09:59

I just love that we call this a time out, seems like the perfect juvenile response to juvenile behaviour.

posted by Mitheral 24 January | 10:01

Jon was being lame, I told him so and I told him why I thought so, nicely and gently, in an email, which any of you can do should you ever wish to do so. I think banning anyone over anything other than repeated personal attacks or spamming is a mistake and leads to a slippery slope.

Sorry Taz, you know I'm a big fan but that was a mistake, I don't really know what the right thing to do was however, but that was not it. I was not going to comment at all, but seeing as how the admins are commenting I'm taking that as license.

In the end humanity in all its crudity, vanity and impulsiveness was displayed on all sides, though, what else can we ask for in this dirty old life?

When the robots take over we won't even have the option of derailing threads or banning people. I say make hay while the sun shines my darlings.

posted by Divine_Wino 24 January | 10:04

I just love that we call this a time out, seems like the perfect juvenile response to juvenile behaviour.

Jon can't reply to that comment in public because he is on a "time out", so if you want to do something other than preen your tailfeathers why not email it to him.

I'm going to channel him for a moment though:

*Puts on headphones, rocks out to Beat on the Brat, drinks peppermint schnapps stolen from the liquor cabinet, passes out, wakes up and reads comicbooks*

Alright, enough from me then.

posted by Divine_Wino 24 January | 10:10

I think banning anyone ....

My understanding (and hope) is that this isn't a banning, but rather a temporary intervention.

posted by danostuporstar 24 January | 10:17

Yeah yeah, I meant that, I'm not trying to muddy the waters, I'm just too much of an anarchist to be able to properly use these terms of social control :) .

That is the first time I have ever used an emoticon ever. I feel thrilled and kind of slutty, like I just did it in a car with someone I don't know.

posted by Divine_Wino 24 January | 10:24

Divino, it seems to me that you are overlooking a somewhat general sentiment here: jon has been making people uncomfortable. He is very smart, funny and opinionated which make him a loved member. But lately (and I have noticed that over in Mefi as well) he has been just *everywhere*, *all the time*.

I like both him and pips very much (I have said that during better times) so I am sad they are out, same goes to joe famous, but I am frightened that someone would not back off even after repeated and public warnings. That was my problem with the ongoings yesterday. Jon came off as completely disrespectful to the people in that thread but also to the fact that he was asked to back off. Nobody silenced him, fer crying out loud. A couple of comments are enough to make your point. If he wanted to take it further, why not start another thread, where people did not have to participate if they did not want?

Of course we all like to live unregulated lives in unregulated communities but in the end, we all recognize that a level of administration has got to be done (everywhere in every day life, at home, with the kids, at school, at work and such). Well, if that is the case, we are being totally unfair when we come back and protest that someone took action. It is very unfair and a little ridiculous in my eyes to take this to the level of censorship, fascism and control.

posted by carmina 24 January | 10:43

It is unfair and ridiculous to call it ensorship, fascism and control. That is what I meant.

posted by carmina 24 January | 10:46

Jon can't reply to that comment in public because he is on a "time out", so if you want to do something other than preen your tailfeathers why not email it to him.

My email is listed, if Jon or anyone else wants to they are welcome to email me about it. I'll probably even post it if they ask.

And I wasn't preening, I have no opinion one way or the other on the justice of Jon's time out because I haven't read the original thread. I'm strictly going on the mods not feeling Jon's behaviour was up to adult standards evidenced by them giving him a little break.

posted by Mitheral 24 January | 10:50

* Votes against soc.culture.tibet *

posted by seanyboy 24 January | 10:51

Carmina
I was mocking myself a bunch there, I don't think it's censorship or "fascism" at all, at most a severe response to a situation that no one should have to respond to. I thought that my joke was obvious, I'm sorry that it was not.

Look, I'm making a mess of this too, which is proof that these things are best handled in private. I'm not mad with anyone. Va un abrazo.

posted by Divine_Wino 24 January | 10:55

Whoa, goings on at MetaChat! I hope everyone comes back to the table after they calm down a little bit.

Whether or not one generally supports timeouts, or this timeout in particular, it doesn't seem to rise to the level of fascism or authoritarian overzealousness. One of the joys of MeCha is that you can start a thread about whatever you want.

posted by omiewise 24 January | 10:55

For those of you who have wondered why I was not participating very actively in Metachat these last few months, it's because I was sick and tired of both jonmc's behavior and his complete and utter inability to see what he was doing to the site even when he was directly asked to stop. He was making this place not fun for me.

I think you'll be seeing a bit more of me around these parts now.

posted by matildaben 24 January | 11:02

Divino, very glad to hear you were joking. Sorry if I mistook your anarchist and "robots taking over the world" seriously, I am a bit sensitive to that, you see?

posted by carmina 24 January | 11:05

≡ Click to see image ≡

posted by dodgygeezer 24 January | 11:06

*still doesn't know what a scottish handshake is & is too lazy to google*

posted by mygothlaundry 24 January | 11:24

I don't guess anybody's saying 'Gee, I wonder what box thinks about all this,' but, if you are, keep reading. In the manner of a small-town newspaper, I'm going to mention a lot of people by name.

Pretty much everything I was going to say has already been said.

I'll miss jonmc, though I agree that he is sometimes very good at monopolizing a conversation, and sometimes very bad at taking a hint. I'll also miss pips, and Joe Famous (and has anyone else decided to take a self-imposed hiatus? If so, I'll probably miss them too--to paraphrase a couple Stevie Wonder songs, while I don't love every little thing about you, I love having you around). I'm happy to hear from mats, and I'm happy to learn that D_W hasn't decided to take a break, because, to paraphrase a Heart song, I'm crazy on them.

omie and carmina and Mitheral are right, I think, that this timeout is less like fascist authoritarian censorship, and more like being sent to stand in the corner for a while. Then again, for quite a few years I couldn't imagine an authority more cold and heartless than the little old lady that monitored the playground at Holy Family.

And everybody who's making comparisons to the neighborhood bar and playground and like that (did mullacc start it?)--I think you're right.

taz (and other mods): do you know how long this timeout is scheduled to last, and, if so, will you share that information?

So, to summarize, I think everybody's right (or, at minimum, I can see where you're coming from (except for Eide--put some pants on, for Chrissake)), and I hope fervently that all of us (and 'us' is definitely a group that includes jon and pips and JF) can take it as a learning experience and move on. And if you'd like to discuss this thing with me privately, though I can't imagine why anyone would, my email's in my profile.

Also: triple sigh, and what the hell's a Scottish handshake?

Also also: This would be a much more entertaining thread if it was being conducted in iambic pentameter, or battle rhymes, or if the first letters of each word in a comment spelled the last word of the previous comment.

posted by box 24 January | 11:30

*googles for the lovely lady in black*

A headbutt.

posted by danostuporstar 24 January | 11:31

Jon can come back in a week, but he needs to contact me to see if we talk about it and reach an honest understanding. Because I don't want to do this again. It makes me feel like shit, and can't be all that fun for him either. Stupid waste of thought and energy.

posted by taz 24 January | 11:41

Everyone who has noted, by the way, that jon can't talk back here is absolutely correct.

If I were very brave about being called a tyrant, &tc. (SOME MORE /Dumb&Dumber voice) I'd close commenting here. If y'all are cool with that, let me know.

If not, watch what you're saying and try to keep it constructive and not piling or picking.

posted by taz 24 January | 11:48

I also feel weird about this. One of the really nice things about this place is it's friendly, non-snarky atmosphere. I don't here anybody suggesting that jonmc was being deliberately nasty. Just obtuse.

Is there any way that, in extreme cases, someone who is taking liberties can be locked out of a specific thread? That would serve as a gentler way to keep things on an even keel and still give the offender a chance to plead his case elsewhere. An eventual time-out would seem a lot more justified if it were the result of a series of smaller, less dramatic acts of administrative control.

posted by felix betachat 24 January | 12:15

I feel somewhat hurt by jonmc's first response to the post (while making it clear that I think he's a good person and that this was more bratty than mean)--the coolness of these people stems from their creativity, not their smoking.

posted by brujita 24 January | 12:30

This is not the first time that someone has been given a timeout. I know of one other, which probably slipped under the radar since it occurred rather quietly. There may have been other quiet ones that I am not aware of.

posted by matildaben 24 January | 12:36

No more than three, I think, including this.

Felix, that's maybe not a bad idea if it could be done (we don't have that possibility now). Of course it ups the babysitting aspect... and that part, when it has to happen, really does get tiring. Mentally, emotionally and even physically. Truly.

posted by taz 24 January | 12:42

Scottish handshake - forehead applied to nose at extreme closeness.
The Zidane thing was just a head butt to the chest.

posted by alicesshoe 24 January | 12:55

Umm. I thought we were all friends here. This is the nice place. MeFi is for the unhappy stuff. You know, the bashing and arguing and general snarkiness.

I don't know what happened that caused the time-out, but I think we should let that stay between jonmc and the mods. Because it sucks enough that (1) jonmc had to have a time-out and (2) the mods had to do something i'm sure was not enjoyable for them any more than it was for him.

/crazy "love one another" rant

posted by brina 24 January | 13:14

Because comments AREN'T closed yet, and because I have started typing a comment a few times, then abandoned them, I think I will contribute the following:

I completely support the use of time outs, and/or bans when and if warranted.

This isn't my site, but I come here enough to feel like I have a stake in it. If I had tons more time, and more technical skills, I might have come up with something similar, or offered to help maintain this joint. For me, there isn't another spot on both internets that houses a more interesting bunch of people, whose intellect, collective (and individual) wit, and talents interest me more.

There have been multiple times when jon's derailing and pooping on other's thoughts have irritated me. In fact, I started yapping at him in thread once. Then, I decided to take it to email. He and I very civilly exchanged emails. He essentially thanked me for my concern (I was worried that his extreme negativity had a specific cause) and then went on to justify his behavior AGAIN. But, it did seem to me that he heard what I was saying, and did settle down.

I don't mean to out anyone with this story except to say that while jon is definitely one of the quickest wits I have known, and his musical knowledge is something I continue to learn from, considering myself a music geek too, he is also remarkably cement-headed. I hope that doesn't count as name-calling, honestly, I would tell him that in person is I could. (hell, I'll prolly email him a link to this comment). I think (and this comment is ALL about what I think) that if jon's behavior can't be controlled by jon, then our admins, who ARE willing and able to contribute time and effort to this online community I call mecha...are more than welcome to sit him out for a week.

If I ever offend anyone thusly, or am out of line, I welcome the same treatment.

To summarize, jon's an good guy, who shoots him mouth off too much sometimes, and is probably thankful he doesn't get beaten up more often. Jon is also likely thankful that he's got such a great group of friends to help him learn his way through life. It's not easy, even when you CAN censor yourself.

(I think that's the longest comment I have ever written)

posted by richat 24 January | 13:15

both internets

Not to derail, but - huh?

posted by amro 24 January | 13:38

Does anyone remember back in the day, here, when threads would get derailed, and folks would just say, "No worries; there's no such thing as a derail here," just like they do for double posts? I do.

If you were a professional bass fisherman, and jonmc was a big trophy bass, you would fish in the hole he lived in again and again, because no matter what bait you threw in, you'd be sure to get a bite. I don't think it's concrete-headedness as much as rising to all sorts of bait. If you look on that thread, that's what happened. Taz warned him, but then people kept throwing lures into the water. I can just hear his fishy little voice: "Hey, is that a mayfly? SHIT! It's got a hook in it."

Maybe that's something he should work on, maybe all the holes in his lip oughtta tell him something. Maybe less sporting fisherpersons want to leave him on the bank to drown in the air (some dumb kid's always ruining a good thing), though I suspect some of the same might want to bucket him, take him home, poach him with dill and butter, and eat him up.

So maybe this time he swallowed the lure. You know, there's a way to remove those hooks without ripping his throat out. But you have to be patient.

He's a great trophy bass, and you'd be a fool to give up on that fishing hole. After all, he's the secret of your longterm success on the BassMaster Pro circuit.

posted by Hugh Janus 24 January | 13:47

amro: It's an old flub of GW I think...he referred to "the internets"

That is one hell of an analogy Hugh. I dunno if it's all accurate, but wow, what a piece of work.

posted by richat 24 January | 14:03

Look, I don't want to say a whole lot here, because it's hard to say anything without sounding like I'm kicking jon when he's down, but we haven't turned into some rulez place where mods are waiting to pounce on anyone who strays from the subject.

Jon consistently takes over threads on pet subjects of his, of which there are many, and floods them with comments so that he pretty much matches everyone else's comments combined, and if he has something against the subject of the post, he won't let people talk about it. He just keeps hammering away at why he doesn't like xyz. The people who do want to talk about the actual subject can't, because he won't let them, and it just becomes a back and forth thing between jon and everyone else. He could make a different thread about why xyz sux, or how much better abc is, but he chooses to take over the existing thread by main force.

We're not running around giving time outs everytime a topic takes twists and turns, but laying siege to a thread and turning it by brute force into the something else that you'd rather talk about - on a consistent, even predictable, basis - is something different.

posted by taz 24 January | 14:16

We've had the bar analogy
The Bass finder analogy

and they're all right.

jon has to learn how not to rise to the bait. If you read my 'blue Monday' post, I was the chowderhead who didn't understand the lay of the land.

Similarly here, jon may think, hey, if someone doesn't like it, they can ignore me or shit down my throat, by all means.

It's all about the listening and understanding, sometimes.

Judging from Hugh's Subject post, not the Bass finder one here, he seems miffed by a lot here. I don't know why, but may he find it.

posted by alicesshoe 24 January | 14:20

It's not Jon rising to the bait. No one was luring him.

It's exactly what taz said (Thanks, taz.)/: he's been laying siege to a thread and turning it by brute force into the something else that you'd rather talk about - on a consistent, even predictable, basis.

posted by Specklet 24 January | 14:31

Apparently, when I get annoyed, I can no longer type.

posted by Specklet 24 January | 14:32

I think it's great that all the people who know Jon in real life are rallying on his behalf, but it's not how he acts in real life that most of us care about - it's only how he acts here on this site.

If anybody wants me, I'll be in time-out with my hubby.

I'm picturing the two of you sitting in hard wooden chairs that have been turned towards the wall. You're holding hands behind the chairs. You're both pouting. I wish someone would draw a picture of what I see in my head, because it's pretty funny. See you in a week.

posted by iconomy 24 January | 14:39

Someone acts like a dick, gets warned for said dickitude, continues to act like a dick, gets slapped down. End of story.

If jonmc is really the Advocate of Personal Responsibility® he claims to be in that smoking thread, he ought to be embarrassed for his wife's histrionics and convince her to apologize to the admins. (I mean seriously, censorship-img spam? You didn't flinch a bit before you posted those? Not once?)

Of course, if he looked favorably upon her actions, then this whole thing is like a doublethick irony shake with an extra helping of waahped cream.

posted by quantumetric 24 January | 14:41

I have one busy week at work, and I miss everything. This is the first I've read of all this craziness. Holy cow.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 January | 14:57

*sends huge box of virtual sausage biscuits and pickled pig's feet to jonmc and pip's address along with a few board games*

Boy do I feel clueless. What else around here have I not been noticing????

posted by bunnyfire 24 January | 15:54

quantumetric, that is really out of order, imo. Pips is probably the least histrionic person I know. (And yes, I do know her in person, not just online.)

posted by essexjan 24 January | 16:05

Yeah, quantumetric. Especially for that to be your 17th comment.

posted by Specklet 24 January | 16:14

ok, jon didn't rise to any bait.

Hopefully he knows that if he wants to say your topic sucks, to start his own thread. Maybe he's been told that plenty of times though, I'm not aware of that.

I don't know him personally, BTW.

I have been told I'm abrasive. I know I haven't got a brake and sometimes can't bite my tongue. Also, typing doesn't do justice compared to a voice. I've thought about posting voice, because it comes across differently. Especially if one hasn't met face to face.

I'm not buying...
it's not how he acts in real life that most of us care about - it's only how he acts here on this site. —iconomy

Why would someone act differently anywhere else¿
It's his choice.
Time for jon to address his issues and get past the denial stage. Seems many have told him plenty of times.
Nurse, double the dose.

posted by alicesshoe 24 January | 16:14

and has anyone else decided to take a self-imposed hiatus?

I've done it several times, both here and the other place. And *sniff* no one *sniff* seems to notice *sob*.

I find a weeks worth of self imposed no commenting makes it a bit easier to avoid reflexively hitting the post button. It sure is weird though when one's My Comments page has nothing on it.

posted by Mitheral 24 January | 16:24

I don't know, I've always liked what I've read from pips, and I bear her no ill-will, but I too thought those images were way over the top, rude, and unkind to administrators who were reacting to the choices jon made in that thread.

Then, on top of that, she started a thread on the front page to announce her departure into a self-imposed timeout. (Compare to Joe Famous's regrettable, but understated departure in the thread.) Those two things together seem pretty undeniably histrionic to me.

That's ok, everyone is entitled to a little histrionics here and there, especially if a loved one is being challenged. MeCha members (myself included) indulge in histrionics in all kinds of threads which seem to encourage them. But I don't think it's fair to then act like pips wasn't being dramatic in both instances, and like the two instances don't add up to a histrionic moment, no matter how much we like her.

posted by omiewise 24 January | 16:29

Is it really worth all this?

To me, MeCha is all about the people who are here, participating, on any given day. I didn't miss any of you who were gone. I won't miss anyone who decides to leave.

When anyone comes back, I'm not going to notice they were gone unless they tell me. Hanging on to all these comings and goings is fluffing the egos of narcissists.

MetaChat is bigger than all of us. It doesn't need you, but it's glad you're here.

posted by kyleg 24 January | 17:18

Mmmmmm, interesting point, kyleg, but I'm pretty sure Metachat NEEDS me. Or it might cease to exist!

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 January | 17:31

That's really well said, kyleg.

posted by taz 24 January | 17:34

This sucks, because I too like Jon, one of our true characters, but jeezopete does he have a self-control problem. I support the time-out and hope there is some accomodation at week's end.

I wish Pips would see this as his problem and not something drawing lines around people for exclusionary purposes.

posted by stilicho 24 January | 17:36

For those of you who have wondered why I was not participating very actively in Metachat these last few months, it's because I was sick and tired of both jonmc's behavior... He was making this place not fun for me.

I think you'll be seeing a bit more of me around these parts now.

You mean we can't have it both ways? (kidding! kidding! I actually miss you, jon.)

I've been thinking around this issue more than it's probably my business to, because on the one side, I hate censorship, and I could see taz's own desire to quit manifesting itself in that thread, but on the other hand, jon's overbearingness is probably at its least welcome in a quit-smoking thread. I've decided to formally refrain from having an opinion. I can't be as gleeful as mudpuppie, but I can see taz's side on this. I miss jon, but maybe the time off will allow him some time to reflect (and spend quality time with Pips). I didn't even see Joe Famous' exit. But hey, the fireplace will be warm for any and all when they return, if they're ready to play ball and not use their return as a chance to heap scorn upon those already chastened.

And if this comment earns me a timeout, well, it was well worth it for the chance to speak what little mind I have.

posted by Eideteker 24 January | 17:49

I know jonmc in real life and had an intimate friendship with him less than a year ago. I have personal reasons for disliking his intrusion in gaspode's anti-smoking thread because for a week after I quit smoking, he'd come by my cubicle every day and say to me, "So, have you started smoking again?"

I thought it was funny at first and told my boyfriend. He got a horrified look on his face and said that deliberately wishing for someone to return to smoking after they'd already decided to quit was the most assholish thing a person could do. And he's right.

Since then, jonmc's been better about me not-smoking and we talk much less in the office than we used to, party by my choice and partly because they've given me more responsibility and I can't read MeCha as often as I used to. However, I will say that one of jonmc's other habits was to come by my desk every time he thought he was being unfairly treated in a MeCha thread to tell me about it. I'm not sure what his aim was/is there, but that's what he'd do. And that's how I learned about that thread and now this one.

I am proud to know him as a person because he is such a smart guy and a good writer. I also think he's got lots of issues, and with time maybe he'll be able to overcome them. He's made a good start by doing that music blog, and once I've got more free time, I'm definitely going to read all of those entries.

But I'm glad he got that time out, because he needed it. That thread wasn't meant for him, and because it dealt with being a positive influence towards people who are quitting smoking, his act of posting reasons to continue smoking was akin to trolling. And I don't know about you, but I hate Internet trolls with a passion.

I wouldn't mind if more people got time-outs for this kind of behavior. I do lots of thinking about what is debate and a genuine opposing opinion versus what is trolling because of my position as a co-mod of a community for New Yorkers on LJ. There's at least one person in that community whom I can't personally stand because his or her private journal includes racist remarks, but because he or she isn't being racist in the community, I can't perform a ban operation.

(Oh, and brujita, you're right. Those folks were great because they had talent, not because they smoked. Pips is an awesome and talented poet, but she doesn't directly smoke. Being talented doesn't automatically make you a smoker, and vice versa.)

Not that we're marking down sides or anything, but I'll be over here in the "I agree with the mods' decision" camp. And I'll be making s'mores, too.

posted by TrishaLynn 24 January | 17:56

Enough already with the attacks on pips. People are allowed to stick up for their partners. After a brief angry flurry, she did the right thing and bought this issue to a new thread. A thread in which she only voiced solidarity. This is an admirable thing to do. There's no reason to be attacking someone who doesn't deserve it.

Keep it pleasant, people.

posted by seanyboy 24 January | 17:57

I'm not really sure how or why my comment came across as gleeful, though at least two people think it was. It's not like I was dancing on anyone's grave. I was just trying to say that I appreciated taz's decision and that I'd been annoyed by the ongoing behavior.

If I sounded gleeful, it was more likely an overzealous attempt to sound supportive of taz. For a good 8 hours, no one had said anything positive about it, and I was kind of worrying that the guilt would get the better of her. She's a big girl, of course, but I just wanted to go on record as saying that I appreciated what she did for the good of the site.

[The "what she did for the good of the site" is, of course, my own perspective. You can substitute "what she was trying to do" if it feels better. I know not everyone will agree; that's pretty evident at this point.]

And if this comment earns me a timeout, well, it was well worth it for the chance to speak what little mind I have.

Has this really resulted in a feeling that one comment that rubs someone the wrong way will result in a time-out?

If people really feel that way, I can only say that you haven't been paying attention. It was a pattern of behavior that was addressed, not a single slip of the tongue.

posted by mudpuppie 24 January | 18:02

Pips is entitled to her feelings; I've been there myself. I, too, have a friend who has strong opinions about certain topics and is hard pressed not to share them when the red flag is waved in front of her face. It's burned her more than once.

I used to get self-righteously outraged whenever someone stomped all over her, and be bitter and pissy to the offending party. Then I finally figured out that it never accomplished anything, and that if I was going to continue to be her friend, I had to decide if her positive aspects (of which there were many) outweighed the occasional tempest in a teacup. After that, I determined that I was much more useful being supportive to her instead of publicly venting spleen on her behalf. It eliminated a lot of stress on my part, and it made her feel better a lot faster.

So, yeah, histrionics. I know whereof I speak. It doesn't help. It also doesn't help that I am fond of clever turns of phrase (usually not mine), and perhaps grew a bit too enamored of the 'irony shake' to let it go.

I apologize to the admins for throwing my ration of gasoline on the fire.

posted by quantumetric 24 January | 18:10

I had skipped that thread entirely, after the first one or two comments. I don't smoke, so it seemed kinda irrelevant.

I was also sitting here yesterday thinking that it was one of the more ho-hum, boring days I have seen in Mecha since I have been here. I guess I was wrong.

posted by danf 24 January | 18:10

Without weighing in on the specific issue in question, I just want to add that I trust taz and seanyboy's moderation of the site implicitly. I think it's safe to say we only see the smallest bits of evidence of the massive amounts of work, both technical and interpersonal, that it takes to keep this site such a consistently safe and positive place. They are light-handed and fair, and only reinforce the norms when community efforts have failed to be effective. When things like this happen, it's because it was time, and if it happened to me I'd certainly be willing to take my lumps, considering the source.

It's true that no one member is the soul of MetaChat, but at the same time, the collective qualities of intelligence and wit we all say we enjoy will diminish if the the numberof people who are willing to read and capable of making interesting contributions drops. If members are behaving in a way which is alienating a significant number of other members, or encouraging them to stay away, that's not good for the community as a whole.

This process, while unpleasant for many, is how we as a community discover and affirm where the boundaries are.

posted by Miko 24 January | 18:14

Has this really resulted in a feeling that one comment that rubs someone the wrong way will result in a time-out?

Ha ha, no, that was rather tongue in cheek. Point taken about supporting taz, though. I hadn't followed the original thread after jon's timeout was announced, so I thought people were being supportive of taz already.

posted by Eideteker 24 January | 18:16

I used to get self-righteously outraged whenever someone stomped all over her, and be bitter and pissy to the offending party. Then I finally figured out that it never accomplished anything, and that if I was going to continue to be her friend, I had to decide if her positive aspects (of which there were many) outweighed the occasional tempest in a teacup. After that, I determined that I was much more useful being supportive to her instead of publicly venting spleen on her behalf. It eliminated a lot of stress on my part, and it made her feel better a lot faster.

So let me get this straight:

You went from being someone who would get pissy when your friend got stomped on, to being someone who stomps all over a person?

Where is this support of which you speak?

Also, I'll say it again: who are you to make these judgement calls on the situation when you've made less than 20 comment on the site? Lay off.

posted by Specklet 24 January | 18:24

quantumetric,

An afterthought:

Sorry. That came off too harsh. I liked your apology to the admins.

posted by Specklet 24 January | 18:31

In email conversation with Taz I came to realize that what she did wasn't a mistake and I apologized to her for saying so, she graciously declined my offer to apologize publicly (actually pubicly, which... ha ha..gross.. she was also gracious about my typo), but then I realized I needed to say it here. So, sorry Taz, you do a job I would refuse to do with a strong measure of grace and a light touch.

Jon is my good friend and I will always stand by him and keep my chastisements of him private.

In fact, I am strictly keeping all my discussions on this subject private from now on.

I thank you kindly for your time and wish very badly for a cigarette and a large glass of warm vodka.

My love to all, even (although to a lesser degree) those who seem to be chiming in without much claim to having a dog in this race.

posted by Divine_Wino 24 January | 18:32

Not to nitpick on your very nice comment, DW, but as you just demonstrated, none of us really can know what private conversations have taken place between members or between members and admins. There's often undercurrent that we're not privy to, so it isn't always clear who has a dog in the race and who doesn't.

Though there are certainly some cases where it is clearer than others.

I'm just saying we owe each other the benefit of the doubt.

posted by Miko 24 January | 18:52

Props to the admins for everything, in addition to just the jrama. It's pretty clear that the decision was not made in haste.

And FWIW, I wish all of the protest signoffs (forgive me if I'm wrong about the word "protest", it's just hard to see it any other way) would stop (come back Hugh and Joe!). It just seems unnecessary given the circumstance.

posted by Hellbient 24 January | 19:25

Enough already with the attacks on pips.

Where have there been attacks on pips? Unless you work for the Bush administration, calling an apple an apple is not attacking anyone.

posted by omiewise 25 January | 08:24

Wow, I totally missed all of this and I'm here everyday. Sciurus told me about this last night and he's never here, guess I'm just reading the wrong threads.

Here's my opinion for anyone that cares (if you don't care then just skip this): I'm sorry that jonmc had to get a time out but I do think it's important for people to learn that not everything is about them especially if their comments are regularly preventing other people from enjoying the site.

For those who took the self-imposed time outs: I admire your loyalty to a friend whom you feel is being unjustly treated.

To the admins who imposed the time out: Thank you for being strong enough to keep metachat for everybody.

For the rest of us: Can't we just all get along? Please? For the children's sake.

Now back to my regularly scheduled posting.

posted by LunaticFringe 26 January | 10:26

See, I go away for a couple of weeks and things go bad all over again!

For what it's worth at this late stage, I fully support this decision because, even though I generally enjoy jonmc's comments, they have been getting waaay to pervasive lately and anyone who is that much in everyone's face after repeated warnings needs to be made to sit in the corner, whether that corner is virtual or flesh-based. I also admire pips for standing up for her man, although the censorship jabs rubbed me up the wrong way mightily.

Really, to expect everyone to "just get along" all the time is too much to ask. That we have so few instances of this type of thing is a credit to all the members here and, even more so, to Mother taz who keeps us all in check.

posted by dg 29 January | 01:43

24 January 2007