MetaChat REGISTER   ||   LOGIN   ||   IMAGES ARE OFF   ||   RECENT COMMENTS




artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene

Home

About

Search

Archives

Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye

Emcee

IRC Channels

IRC FAQ


 RSS


Comment Feed:

♦ RSS

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

04 May 2010

Hi guys, I think this comment on Jezebel is pretty great... →[More:]Jezebel user AmosTrue says:

I'm a bit tired of narratives of personal growth, not because of the way they feed into gender expectations (although that's very interesting) but because of the way they usually side step questions of social responsibility to seek change in the broader world...

I have a very bad habit of reading life coach blogs and this comment beautifully articulates my GRAR with them. Except I would add "ESPECIALLY because of the way they feed into gender expectations" because it is really very sad and sad and sad to me that life coaching (since this is my vice it's the example I'm sticking with) is largely women preying on other women, making their issues seem UNIQUE SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE GET HAPPY DANCE AROUND YOUR LIVING ROOM EAT PRAY LOVE ROOLZ POLITICS DROOLZ rather than consciousness raising about the ways in which the patriarchy makes lots of the problems we face not unique at all. BUT YOU ARE A UNIQUE INDIVIDUAL WHO NEEDS TO CHOOSE HAPPINESS AND IF YOU'RE SAD YOU CHOSED THAT TO DEATH STUPID YOU STOP CHOOSING TO CHOOSE WRONG YOU BAD CHOOSER.

So, um, yeah.

You?
post by: birdie at: 16:14 | 92 comments
I think this happens in other areas, too. I mean, Scott Adam's personal triumph against "incurable" spasmodic dysphonia is all well and good, but there's an underlying implication that he is smarter than (or at least more driven than) OTHER sufferers of the disorder, who have NOT had the audacity to attempt to cure themselves from this "incurable disorder".
posted by muddgirl 04 May | 16:26
"social responsibility to seek change in the broader world"

Sounds a bit evangelistic to me.

posted by Ardiril 04 May | 16:35
Evangelism is about changing other people - conversion from "bad" choices to a "good" choices.

Activism tends to recognize that we can't change people, we can only (hopefully) change circumstances. I believe that it's activism and not evangelism that the comment is advocating for.
posted by muddgirl 04 May | 16:45
Seeking "change in the broader world" sounds hard. At some point, I think most individuals are better off just worrying about their own lot in life.
posted by mullacc 04 May | 17:26
Sure, individuals probably are better off.

*sigh*
posted by muddgirl 04 May | 17:37
"Evangelism is about changing other people"

Exactly, and the comment quoted is stating that people should recognize both that they have a social responsibility and that they should act on it. However, that particular social responsibility has a broad spectrum of interpretation in that the anti-gay/anti-choice element also "seek change in the broader world". Further, both that comment and your example of Scott Adams are toeing the line of ableism.
posted by Ardiril 04 May | 17:37
*sigh*

Fuck you.
posted by mullacc 04 May | 17:43
Looking back, I realize that I do not have a link to Adam's original blog post. It is possible that "Angsuman Chakraborty" is putting words into his mouth. If so, I apologize to Mr. Adams and maintain that Chakraborty can take his sanctimonious attitude towards those who don't have "self-effort" and shove it. My father has Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and it is frankly offensive when folks like Chakraborty say, "I cured myself of CFS! And SO COULD YOU if only you would GET UP AND DO IT!" (almost as offensive as those who claim its all in his head. Almost.)

mullacc: Is that necessary?
posted by muddgirl 04 May | 17:44
You know what, fuck it. I thought I would give Metachat a second chance after the moderator change but I am done.
posted by muddgirl 04 May | 17:45
It was just a necessary as your "sigh." Later.
posted by mullacc 04 May | 17:48
My issue with life coaching is that it strikes me as kind of an ersatz substitute for psychotherapy that people resort to because their insurance won't cover a full round of real mental health treatment.

So instead of exploring the issues that have gotten you into the mess you're in and confronting difficult and uncomfortable truths about yourself and the important people in your life, you get cheerleading, you get someone blowing smoke up your ass and telling you to take on the world when you really don't have the emotional skills or insight to do that.
posted by jason's_planet 04 May | 17:58
I agree j_p and the harm I have seen done to "in need" people in these cases is enormous.

(I will miss muddgirl)
posted by MonkeyButter 04 May | 18:17
I think muddgirl had a salient point about activism and jason's_planet, I agree about it being a poor stand-in for therapy but in my readings (and I may be experiencing confirmation bias for sure) it's largely middle-class to upper middle-class white women who need to hear why it's ok to not feel guilty for being awesome and (relatively) rich and dance! sing! travel to Europe! You deserve it!

That said, wow. I don't even know what happened here, but I know for sure what didn't happen was awesome reading comprehension.
posted by birdie 04 May | 18:18
Well, I know who to automatically dismiss now, so that's handy.

*sigh*
posted by Madamina 04 May | 19:43
There is a way to be an activist without treating people who hold differing opinions like enemies, children, or idiots. It doesn't involve sighing.
posted by Hugh Janus 04 May | 20:42
There is a way to be an activist without treating people who hold differing opinions like enemies, children, or idiots. It doesn't involve sighing.

lol wut

I'd say something about pot kettle etc., but since kettle added actual content to the thread and pot didn't bother with anything other than being patronizing...well.
posted by birdie 04 May | 20:59
Who is the pot and who is the kettle? So far the only case of patronizing was muddgirl's rude reply to my comment.
posted by mullacc 04 May | 21:08
Seeking "change in the broader world" sounds hard. At some point, I think most individuals are better off just worrying about their own lot in life.

Yeah, well, I agree with the first bit. I think it *is* hard. I personally am interested in taking on that particular challenge, but I agree that not everyone is.

There is possibly an interesting conversation to be had here about (what I perceive as) the fetishization of the individual above all, particularly in American culture. But it might come off as a bit fighty if I started it here. Hrm.

(To take a complete left turn, it's because I've been thinking about "opt-out" organ donation lately, and why the US is one of the few developed countries that doesn't have it. And how it's unsurprising to me, because it would require government regulation and blah blah blah ramble....)
posted by gaspode 04 May | 21:09
lol wut

Come on, I used sentences; I don't give a shit about your respect but at least show some regard for what was a pretty reasonable explanation of how I saw the stink jump off in this thread. Being dismissive doesn't help to get your point across, it just makes people angry.
posted by Hugh Janus 04 May | 21:21
HJ, you calling someone out on their thread etiquette is delicious.

You're a patronizing dick. Special kudos to Ardiril for the consistent early threadshits in threads about activism or feminism or where the two divinely intersect and the heavens part and the angel choir starts and Ardiril can get in the pithy beside the point one-liner. Thanks, HJ for telling us out loud about your moral high ground and how awesome the view is from there and too bad we can't join you. Hope you don't trip over all that self-righteousness.

So hey, welcome to my flameout! Was fun, no? I'll show myself the door.
posted by birdie 04 May | 21:47
Come on, birdie, HJ has been only completely polite in this thread.
posted by gaspode 04 May | 21:49
What the hell happened here?
posted by Ardiril 04 May | 21:57
I think the original comment is a bit confusing and a bit in medias res but as Jezebel comments go it's very noninflammatory. I think there's a problem that results when people expect every social environment to warp to their attitude and it causes friction. People are different, gender-related issues are thorny and online text is prone to instant polarization.
posted by Firas 04 May | 22:11
HJ, you calling someone out on their thread etiquette is delicious.

I'm pretty sure you're out the door, but if you happen to look in a window on your way to the street, maybe you'll see me wondering why you made things so personal. Do we know each other from way back? Cuz I've definitely been a dick before, just not recently, and not here.

Or was my fault in addressing the topic at all? Was I not welcome? Color me confused.

Good luck in all things, to both of you. I hope we meet again, under less strained circumstances.
posted by Hugh Janus 04 May | 22:13
My question was not meant to be as speciously innocent as it sounds to me now. I know I am abrasive, but I didn't read anything in mullacc's or HJ's comments to merit such outbursts.
posted by Ardiril 04 May | 22:22
WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA! Dudes, seriously, what the hell is going on here? I thought that this was the place that we went to not do that shit that goes on at that other place. I thought that we were respectful and friendly. All of a sudden we've got like a five-way fight getting out of hand? This really isn't fun, please stop doing this. Birdie, don't go, muddgirl, don't go. Please stay and can we all play nice? Please?
Differences are myriad, I thought that was what we all understood here. We don't agree, but when we disagree, we do so more or less politely, and shrug off any residual bad feelings that may crop up on the Filter. I actually thought that was our JOB. And here, in one little seemingly innocuous post about a Jezebel comment, we have not one but TWO members leaving, and insults being tossed left and right? What the hell is this? Really, please stop. We all love and respect one another here, remember?
posted by msali 04 May | 22:31
I thought that this was the place that we went to not do that shit that goes on at that other place. I thought that we were respectful and friendly.

Common misconception. This kind of stuff has been going on for as long as I can remember. It can be nasty to read through, but I also think it's a sign of the real community we have here- we know each other well enough to know whose guts we hate. Maybe it's crazy that I like that, but I do.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 04 May | 22:34
That's so weird, TPS, because I have been around here for four-odd years now, and I know I have seen some weird shit onsite that obviously started elsewhere, but I haven't picked up on any longstanding currents of dislike.

We know each other well enough to know whose guts we hate.

But I don't hate anybody's guts! Bunnyfire pissed me off, sure, but I could never be roused to say that word hate against anyone here. Hell, I guess it never crossed my mind that anyone here would hate anyone else. I honestly thought that it was our JOB to promote goodwill and peace and hippy-dippy unicorn vibes across the meta-verse. With all of our happy birthday wishes, 3 point updates, bunny pictures, photo Fridays, etc. We play nice here, ya dig?
Oh and by the way, TPS, I think you are the BOMB.
posted by msali 04 May | 22:39
I don't think I understood a single thing said in this thread.
posted by Eideteker 04 May | 23:41
"Fuck you." "patronizing dick"
See these things? They are NOT needed.
posted by arse_hat 04 May | 23:52
"*sigh*"

THIS is what is NOT needed. I'm upset that you quote me and not muddgirl's arrogant crap.
posted by mullacc 05 May | 00:14
Be upset then. "*sigh*" seems juvenile but "Fuck you." escalates things into the realm of no more possibility of dialectic.
posted by arse_hat 05 May | 00:23
Fine, I agree to disagree. "*sigh*" is dehumanizing. It's getting in the insult conveyed by "Fuck you" without the hassle of escalating the situation. It's belittling and dishonest.
posted by mullacc 05 May | 00:26
"'*sigh*' is dehumanizing"? Wow! I don't see how even "Fuck you" is dehumanizing. It seems this thing is far deeper than my little mind can fathom! "belittling and dishonest" Arguably true, but still within the realm of debate in a way "Fuck you" just is not.
posted by arse_hat 05 May | 00:44
"It seems this thing is far deeper than my little mind can fathom!" And yes, that was at best dishonest. Sorry.
posted by arse_hat 05 May | 00:46
OH HAI GAIS! WHAT ARE YOU ALL DOING IN HERE?

Oh, rightio then.

*slowly backs out the door*
posted by goshling 05 May | 03:02
Alright, the last time I saw this thread, it had three comments in it. WTF.

There's obviously some outside strife being fought about in this thread, because just reading the thread itself there's no way to understand the out-of-proportion freakouts. Off-site and/or real-life grudges really shouldn't be fought out here- it accomplishes nothing and just stinks the place up for everybody else, most of whom aren't privy to whatever battle it is that's being fought.

I hope nobody feels like they need to leave, and I hope people who don't get along for whatever reason will learn not to be baited by each oher's comments. And Ardiril, you know I love ya bud, but you're good at pissing people off and I wish you'd resist the urge to do it when subjects like the original thread are posted here.

msali summed it up perfectly:
Differences are myriad, I thought that was what we all understood here. We don't agree, but when we disagree, we do so more or less politely, and shrug off any residual bad feelings that may crop up on the Filter.


Everybody please take a deep breath, and let's move on.
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 05:08
And Ardiril, you know I love ya bud, but you're good at pissing people off

BP, can I just say that, of all the people in this thread whose behavior could have been called out specifically by name by a mod, this choice completely flummoxes me?
posted by danostuporstar 05 May | 06:24
You can, but that's not helping us move on.

Ardiril is one of my best friends, so he knows how to find me if he wants to talk.
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 06:39
Let me go ahead and agree with BP here and add that the thing that in particular sends the grar levels skyrocketing isn't disagreeing with someone, it's being dismissive of their opinions. I hope by now we have all learned how to have a lively discussion with someone without doing so. Past evidence on metachat seems to agree with me, because I have very clear memories of people vehemently arguing in one thread and getting along fine in another. Keeping arguments non-personal is the goal, peeps.
posted by gaspode 05 May | 07:59
Alright, the last time I saw this thread, it had three comments in it. WTF.

I'm so disappointed, as well - not just because things spun out of hand in an almost incomprehensible way, but because to all apperances, no one alerted a mod to a coalescing clusterfuck for a very long time. When the epithets and personal attacks start peeking their little heads out, it's time to do that.

I also hope no one leaves over this. To me it appears to be an interpersonal kerfuffle, and there's not much we can do to change the attitudes people hold towards one another here. We can, however, uphold basic civility. MetaChat is still a work in progress and the site guidelines, though we are pretty clear on them in our heads, are not yet written out for all to see. I hope that helps and will expedite it. Short version: the old "don't slag off on other users" still applies. In fact, it's probably our Golden Rule, as nearly 100% of the time when the site has problems, that's the cause.
posted by Miko 05 May | 07:59
..and thanks to gaspode are arse_hat for working to calm things down once they arrived on the scene.
posted by Miko 05 May | 08:03
I'm so disappointed, as well - not just because things spun out of hand in an almost incomprehensible way, but because to all apperances, no one alerted a mod to a coalescing clusterfuck for a very long time.

This site has, what, 10-15 posts a day? Shouldn't the mods be reading them all- isn't that your job, to, you know, look in on things and moderate them?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 09:52
We can't be here 24-7, TPS, and appreciate a little help via people letting us know directly if there's an unaddressed problem on the site.
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 10:23
I understand that; I just think it's a little odd that of however many mods there are, not one of them was here last night. Or wait, no, gaspode is a mod, so there was a mod here last night. So why the tut-tut about how nobody bothered to contact the mods?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 10:26
It's the four-hour gap between when things went visibly wrong and when a mod found it that we'd like to cut down, I think. (Speaking for myself, but I assume that's what Miko was talking about, too.)
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 10:31
I didn't read this until this morning, but I get TPS's point - there isn't an obvious contact a mod link on the front page, for example. I happen to know who mods are and could email them, but is there a central mailbox or something? Just curious, but the scoldy bugs me a little, for the record.
posted by rainbaby 05 May | 10:31
Yes, that's true rainbaby, we've been slow to get a single, handy "go-to" list posted, and this incident has given us a kick in the pants to fix that and a couple of other things, very soon.

Try not to think of it not as scoldy, but as us saying, "We're here to try to help avoid incidents like this; please don't forget you can come to us when these situations arise."
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 10:36
Right, that's what you're saying, but that's not what Miko said.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 10:41
In other words, what rainbaby said: "the scoldy bugs me a little, for the record."
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 10:47
Noted.
posted by BoringPostcards 05 May | 10:54
Well, you know, we are all still hammering out explicit site guidelines to make situations like this a bit easier to deal with. Add to that our own personalities -- yeah, I was here, and you know, when two or three people are sniping at each other, I'm less inclined to be a nanny about it and just let them go for it. It's only when more people get involved that I would be inclined to step in. That's speaking for myself only. Other mods are of course different and it's one of the reasons we are working on guidelines. So other users don't have an expectation of how things are handled based on what I do for example (which is not much! I am a hands-off personality, in general).
posted by gaspode 05 May | 10:56
Shouldn't the mods be reading them all- isn't that your job, to, you know, look in on things and moderate them?

Yes, but all of us are volunteering and have lives outside MetaChat (unbelievably, I know!). For instance, while this unfolded I was moving a couch, having an evening workout, working on a performance review for a staffer, and going to bed early. I don't read the entire site. I scan Recent Comments and I check email. I think that's true for most moderators. I think keeping relatively constant tabs on the site is appropriate for MetaFilter mods, who have a rapidly scrolling site and who are full-time, paid employees. Metachat is different - it started as a labor of love by the initial team, and the existing team stepped in to offer to keep it alive at a time when the initial team was ready to retire. We volunteered to pitch in to keep it alive because we didn't want to see it disappear.

To do that, as volunteers, we need to rely on the users to assist. MeCha doesn't have a MeTa or "callout" culture which brings issues to the surface and makes them first priority, so we do need people to alert us when something is going off the rails. Otherwise, things can reach a point of contention that has gone farther than it needed to. Sure, we check the site regularly and sure one of us is going to eventually see it. But it takes only a very few minutes for a conversation to go from fine to engulfed in flames. In this one it happened in under an hour. Even if I was in another window balancing my checking account, I wouldn't know about it immediately. But if someone emailed, my notification would pop up.

It's definitely not realistic to think the mods can be an omniscient Big Brother, watching all as it unfolds. So please help out when you can.
posted by Miko 05 May | 10:59
It's the four-hour gap between when things went visibly wrong and when a mod found it that we'd like to cut down, I think.

Yeah, that's what I meant. And hopefully, having posted guidelines, and soon, will help people recognize when they're likely to push buttons...and maybe even stop themselves.
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:02
It's definitely not realistic to think the mods can be an omniscient Big Brother, watching all as it unfolds. So please help out when you can.

No. Sorry. Like gaspode, I'm hands-off; if people are going to fight, I'll let 'em do it. And I don't think it's fair for the mods to expect the users to notify them when something is going on and to scold us when we don't. Don't expect us to do your job for you.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 11:03
there isn't an obvious contact a mod link on the front page, for example. I happen to know who mods are and could email them, but is there a central mailbox or something?

Important point. One has to search through old threads to find this info, or know who they are and find emails in profiles. Part of the guidelines development process involves getting them on the Wiki. I don't think the backend will allow us to place a "contact a mod" link that directly emails all mods (chrismear can comment), but what we could do is place a "contact" link in a prominent place that leads to the place on the wiki where current mods are listed.

Part of my reaction is a little wrongheaded, I realize, because in an ideal world there doesn't need to be mod involvement for a thread to stay on the rails and avoid having personal attacks appear. But it's not an ideal world, and we know that the site community as a whole would prefer that guidelines are here and are real and are supported by all users including mods. But in no way do I mean that the absence of a moderator voice = free-for-all time. It's our hangout, let's not shit in it.
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:06
Don't expect us to do your job for you.

My point: Keeping the site an enjoyable and positive place is all of our jobs.
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:08
And we all fulfill different roles toward that goal. We're not all moderators. It's not the general user-bases job to do the things moderators feel responsible for, or to alert moderators when they're supposed to be fulfilling their assumed responsibilities.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 11:11
It's up to you whether you choose to help in that way or not, but we do now and will more explicity be encouraging users to notify us of problems early so they can be solved early. Some people will be more laissez-faire, like you, and that's fine, but the site's health will depend on having at least a few people around who see something happen and send us a "cleanup on aisle 4" note. That's the only way an all-volunteer site is going to work. Individual people are truly responsible only for their own behavior, but we're collectively responsible for the site culture. So it's good that there are people who help in that way.

I think it'll all be easier once the guidelines are up. Hopefully that'll be soon.
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:15
I wouldn't have contacted a mod over this last night, and I've never contacted a mod about anything site-related.

I appreciate the volunteering very much.
posted by rainbaby 05 May | 11:16
we do now and will more explicity be encouraging users to notify us of problems early so they can be solved early

If people choose to do so, that's their choice, and encouraging it a little is OK, but to expect it to the point where everyone is scolded when it doesn't happen goes too far, in my opinion.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 11:22
To be honest, I had no idea this site had moderators. I don't mean that in a sarcastic way at all. I dimly knew that some people were responsible for the technical end of things, and for deciding what pictures go on the sidebar, but I had no clue there are metafilter-style moderators. Do posts and comments get deleted? Do people get booted? I've never noticed.
posted by JanetLand 05 May | 11:24
TPS, the present state of the discussion on moderation is a direct result of the site discussion we had last fall, and of comments like this one, made by you:

I agree with Miko that a lack of visible moderation hurts the site. If there's no one to turn to when there's a problem, if there's no one taking site concerns seriously (and I've felt that in the past), then, yea, people do get disengaged, and plenty of them leave. If all the current mods aren't interested in moderating the site anymore, I think new mods should be brought in (and I'm not volunteering, lol).


I'm sorry if I sounded scoldy, and I do apologize for that. But if folks on the site do want active moderation - and it may have made the difference for some users - the site will depend on people letting a mod know when something gets ugly. That's the "someone to turn to."
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:28
To be honest, I had no idea this site had moderators.

Well, we're in a transition phase that's taken a while from the founding team to a new one, and we've yet to get the info up on the wiki about the new team.

Do posts and comments get deleted?

Sometimes, but only if really egregious and usually with a placeholder notice. It's really rare.

Do people get booted?

Only on a couple occasions in the now-more-distant past, and only after lots of effort on the part of the then mods.
posted by Miko 05 May | 11:30
Hi bunnies,

I've had some emails, so I thought I should say some of this publicly. I regret "getting the last word in" yesterday - it always seems like a good idea but rarely is. This isn't about the moderators (I mentioned that because there was a big "what can we do to bring people back?" thing, and I said something about moderation, and then there were changes and I came back), or about mullacc specifically (do we have a history? I don't think so?), but about the fact that I can't help but nose around in threads that seem to engender personal attacks. I don't need that and Metachat doesn't need that.

I don't hang around on metachat to evangelize or "be the change I want to see" or whatever. I come here to be myself, or as authentic as anyone can be in an online space. Well-respected, established users here don't like who I am. I saw that last year and I regret thinking I could just avoid them. Last time, I didn't make a big deal about leaving and no one seemed to notice. I regret making a big deal about it this time. I'm sure you all can carry on.
posted by muddgirl 05 May | 11:33
muddgirl, I hope you stay, or at least make this just a break. It can get frustrating sometimes but I know I'm not alone in appreciating your participation.
posted by Miko 05 May | 12:00
Well, we're in a transition phase that's taken a while from the founding team to a new one, and we've yet to get the info up on the wiki about the new team.

No, I meant I had no idea that the site EVER had moderators, and I've been here a very long time. The only time I've ever looked at the wiki is to see the birthday list and the radio station stuff.
posted by JanetLand 05 May | 12:05
The only time I've ever looked at the wiki is to see the birthday list and the radio station stuff.

Hmm... Maybe when I take over the wiki admin duties (?), we can set up some kind of "Featured Article" link on the front page of MeCha to draw attention to the wiki.

Ideas:
* Twitter page (as was posted recently)
* In jokes
* Really funny user bios
* [your suggestion here]
* Fun things happen when you click on "Random"

As for a mods contact page, well, we have something like that already for IRC with contact info for each of the chanops. Also useful might be a "time zone" column/field so you know who's likely to be up when the shit is going down.
posted by Eideteker 05 May | 12:59
Meanwhile, I still have no clue what the original post was about.
posted by Eideteker 05 May | 13:00
Check your email, Eideteker!
posted by Miko 05 May | 13:08
What would a moderator have done, if a moderator had been contacted? Deleted comments? Booted members? Scolded us? I wouldn't want any of that to go on, so I wouldn't be inclined to alert anyone. Airing grievances is not such a bad or unhealthy thing. I know there are folks who like to believe that Metachat is the happy-go-lucky alternative to MeFi, but that's a falsehood - people here have strong opinions too and there's no reason to squish them down inside to maintain this facade of bunnies and whuffles all the time.
posted by amro 05 May | 13:14
Check your email, Eideteker!

Why don't you come down here and make me?
posted by Eideteker 05 May | 13:19
I apologize to rainbaby and birdie for my part in this. I thought I had toned down my invective, but from birdie's response, I can see I have not. This thread is not the environment to which I want to contribute, and for that lapse, I apologize to everyone.
posted by Ardiril 05 May | 13:27
What would a moderator have done, if a moderator had been contacted?

Good question. I don't see what would have been different about the top of this thread if a moderator had seen it immediately. The anger started at 17:43 and the pleas for better behavior started at 22:31, about 5 minutes. What would a mod have said that wasn't already said?
posted by JanetLand 05 May | 13:29
Mind, I'm not arguing for or against the existence of moderators; I'm just curious about the role.
posted by JanetLand 05 May | 13:30
About callouts, I'd really much rather that we didn't have a discussed-callout culture on here. I'm seriously weirded out by the oddly puritan nature of public handwringing over whether someone should have put an adverb before or after their noun and what it suggests about their inherent virtues and I like the lack of it here.
posted by Firas 05 May | 13:33
The anger started at 17:43 and the pleas for better behavior started at 22:31, about 5 minutes.

Who "started it" probably isn't the most productive line of thought, but there are some here who feel the personal attacks began at 17:37. And I think you mean "about 5 hours", which may or may not alter your point.
posted by danostuporstar 05 May | 13:46
Dammit, I meant muddgirl, not rainbaby. Sorry, muddgirl. However, rainbaby is still part of my general apology.

] This will probably send Eideteker into a more chaotic state of confusion. [
posted by Ardiril 05 May | 13:46
What would a mod have said that wasn't already said?

It's a bit of a Schroedinger's cat thing at this point with this thread. But in addition to piping into the thread mods might send personal emails, can edit/delete over-the-top stuff, etc., and also be aware of long-term patterns. That can matter because something that looks like a one-time, not-that-big-a-deal is different if it's part of a larger issue that may have been unfolding behind the scenes. (I'm not speaking about this instance, just generally).
posted by Miko 05 May | 13:51
Oh phooey, I can't read times at all, can I? No wonder I'm always late.
posted by JanetLand 05 May | 13:52
Handsome apology, Ardiril...I hope it's accepted. You provide an admirable example which I could usefully learn from.
posted by Miko 05 May | 13:55
] This will probably send Eideteker into a more chaotic state of confusion. [

I swear to god I'm like 5 minutes (or hours) from torching this entire thread if someone doesn't start explaining.
posted by Eideteker 05 May | 14:56
READ man READ.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 05 May | 15:00
i can't read, the fumes from this gas can are making my eyes water ahhhhhhrg
posted by Eideteker 05 May | 15:07
Eide, here is a Visio diagram explaining it all:
≡ Click to see image ≡
posted by arse_hat 05 May | 15:17
Wow arse - it's been a long time since I had a combination LOL/spit take. Thanks.
posted by Miko 05 May | 15:20
I'm glad that it seems like this has gotten worked out, and everyone is making themselves clear, and that no ill will was wished in the end.

Good bunnies hug it out.
posted by msali 05 May | 15:49
muddgirl said: do we have a history? I don't think so?


I don't think so either.
posted by mullacc 05 May | 16:20
OK, who wants pancakes?
posted by ikkyu2 05 May | 23:13
If you're cookin'? Me!
posted by Miko 05 May | 23:31
YAAAAY PANCAKES!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero 06 May | 06:45
I DEMAND WAFFLES!!!11!
posted by deborah 06 May | 16:17
← Pandora’s Briefcase: || Phoenix Suns wearing "Los Suns" jerseys →

HOME  ||   REGISTER  ||   LOGIN
All posts and comments © their authors