Sad the restaurant madness thread was locked

[msduncan]

At first I was like
Then I was like
Then I was all kinds of

[RuperT]

I agree with Sil that the thread wasn't heading much of anywhere at that point, and I bid it a fair adieu, but that was some pretty egregious thread-shitting at the end there.
I also agree with msd that it was fascinating, not unlike a snake charmer's thrall.

[wonderpug]

I just wish it didn't end just after CPF made a suicidal comment.

CPF, don't think about suicide. I hope it was just meant as a jab at killbot737, but just in case it's got a hint of truth behind it, please don't think about suicide. I may have said I'm not eager to meet you in person, but I sure as hell don't want any harm to come to you. I still mourn bcr19374.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Hopefully CPF's comment was just a wee bit of sarcasm, and he realises that throwing his mug of coffee at his own feet would indeed be ill-advised.

[Chesspieceface]

No, I'm really gonna kill myself because killbot says I shouldn't defend myself. I did already actually.

Thanks guys. I'm fine with where it ended... Not like there was a constructive discussion possible with some of the attitudes.

Peace.

[msduncan]

For what it's worth, I would have raged at that bitch too. I would never let another dime of my money grace her pockets. I would also have probably gotten up and left immediately, telling the waitress to forget it and to forget seeing me again in that place.

Thread was locked before I could post that answer to your question.

[ImLawBoy]

Let's not rehash the particulars of that thread and just move it here. It was locked there for a reason, and we don't want it to come back to life here. You can discuss the locking and whether or not you agreed with it, but leave out the content, please.

Thanks.

[killbot737]

I don't want anyone to kill themselves because of something I said, but even if they did I (most likely) wouldn't feel guilty about it.

If some random robot on the internet pushed you over the edge it's really no specific individual's problem that you don't exist anymore. I'd consider you mentally ill and I might be sorry that you didn't get help in time.

Stay alive CPF!

[Chesspieceface]

Let's not rehash the particulars of that thread and just move it here. It was locked there for a reason, and we don't want it to come back to life here. You can discuss the locking and whether or not you agreed with it, but leave out the content, please.

Thanks.

No reason was given other than the mods were apparently tired of watching it. So, once a thread is closed its subject matter is verboten forever? That seems bizarre.

I also don't think that I personally did anything to warrant closing it, which means that anytime the community wants they can shut down my sincere threads by being douchebags. Great... Oh and I get called a fake and a fraud by a moderator who doesn't respond to PM's telling them to fuck themselves.

Classy joint here.

[Rip]

Let's not rehash the particulars of that thread and just move it here. It was locked there for a reason, and we don't want it to come back to life here. You can discuss the locking and whether or not you agreed with it, but leave out the content, please.

Thanks.

No reason was given other than the mods were apparently tired of watching it. So, once a thread is closed its subject matter is verboten forever? That seems bizarre.

I also don't think that I personally did anything to warrant closing it, which means that anytime the community wants they can shut down my sincere threads by being douchebags. Great... Oh and I get called a fake and a fraud by a moderator who doesn't respond to PM's telling them to fuck themselves.

Classy joint here.

When a TOPIC is closed that means just that. Topic closed, no continuing it in other threads. Your PM was not ignored on accident it was a decision, but since you seem to desire a response I am quite sure one is coming. Just don't say you didn't ask for it.

[Chesspieceface]

When a TOPIC is closed that means just that. Topic closed, no continuing it in other threads. Your PM was not ignored on accident it was a decision, but since you seem to desire a response I am quite sure one is coming. Just don't say you didn't ask for it.

I knew it was not on accident. I'll take whatever is coming... If a moderator wants to call me a trolling attention whore, after this many years of posting... I'm sure I can find another fifteen people to chat about PC games with somewhere. Boohoo.

For every person that attacked me there was someone fine with it, or enjoying the thread. I provide content.

[silverjon]

CPF, it's not real classy to send a PM to someone telling them to go fuck themselves either. Why should anyone feel obliged to respond to that? I wouldn't.

Ideally, moderators don't name-call, but they're volunteers, and human, and flawed. And trying to bait them into a PM flame-skirmish runs a bit counter to that ideal of maintaining neutrality. Unless you were hoping for an apology? But "go fuck yourself" is not a good way to go about it.

As for not moving the actual discussion here, it's just not appropriate for a meta thread. I don't think that means that the entire community is ranked against you. If thread-lockdown-via-douchebaggery were to happen regularly, I'd back you up in complaining about it, but one incident doesn't make a pattern.

[Chesspieceface]

I'm not complaining, fwiw. I have taken no action, including not starting this thread. But its far from the first time.

[IceBear]

From reading that thread it was my impression that the mod locked it because it was turning into personal attacks against you cpf and was no longer constructive conversation. I didn't see the lock as an attack against you, but that's just my opinion

[silverjon]

I don't think it's a view of the lock itself as an attack, but a concern that any thread could end up locked due to other individuals deciding to make attacks, thus ending the conversation.

[IceBear]

A valid concern, I agree. I apologize for misunderstanding why cpf was upset

[Kraken]

A touch of melodrama is a refreshing change from the usual chatter sometimes. I enjoyed the thread, although I think it had blown itself out by the time they locked it.

[Chesspieceface]

Is it just me or has every banning and major issue here boiled down to a squad of moralists coming down on someone and continually calling in reinforcements till that person explodes? What happens very quickly is that a climate is created where no one who wants to discuss what's put forth can be bothered for fear they'll be attacked for agreeing or expressing interest. I recognize that straight-laced people tend to assume that everyone else is too, but we aren't and most weirdos learn not to tell anyone for fear of judgment. The house rules seem biased, but its not my house.

[The Meal]

I'll take whatever is coming... If a moderator wants to call me a trolling attention whore, after this many years of posting... I'm sure I can find another fifteen people to chat about PC games with somewhere.

I'm not complaining, fwiw.

I get called a fake and a fraud by a moderator who doesn't respond to PM's telling them to fuck themselves.

Classy joint here.

I'm not complaining, fwiw.

I provide content.

Kudos to the mod who didn't rise to the bait. Sounds like someone was spoiling for a reaction of some sort, -ANY SORT-, of the DEAR GOD PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!! sort. And knowing exactly what it was that would provide you your pellet, he decided not to pull the lever.

Kudos to that mod.

[Isgrimnur]

The house rules seem biased, but its not my house.

Key phrase.

A thread being locked isn't a punishment to the OP or any poster, it's a time-out. Take a step back, take a deep breath, and see where things went pear-shaped and learn from it. For everyone involved.

[Daehawk]

Did it turn out the meany was the owner? If so I'd never go back no matter how good the food.

[silverjon]

I recognize that straight-laced people tend to assume that everyone else is too, but we aren't and most weirdos learn not to tell anyone for fear of judgment. The house rules seem biased, but its not my house.

Speaking as one of the weirdos who shares very little personal information with the general populace partly for fear of social sanction, the "house rules" he's talking about aren't forum rules, but societal ones. It's safer to keep your head down and pretend to be like everyone else.

OO is a relatively safe place to be honest, even if it makes you look like a freak or a jerk. At the same time, if your outlook is very different from mainstream, sometimes it's easier to just not say anything, easier to not have to explain yourself over and over again.

It's not fear of moderation itself. It's fear that if you talk about something you've done that's outside the norm, and a bunch of people call you an asshole over it and a mod decides to do something about the namecalling, the conversation gets cut off too and you're effectively silenced. Maybe a bunch of people follow you around calling you an asshole every time you try to say anything at all, and then you get banned for being a troublemaker. Maybe.

I do think there wasn't much more productive to be said in the thread in question, but I understand the big picture concerns it raises too.

[Chesspieceface]

It's not fear of moderation itself. It's fear that if you talk about something you've done that's outside the norm, and a bunch of people call you an asshole over it and a mod decides to do something about the namecalling, the conversation gets cut off too and you're effectively silenced. Maybe a bunch of people follow you around calling you an asshole every time you try to say anything at all...

Again, and again, and again.

I may have a shitty personality in a lot of people's mind, but this is my authentic self. This is the only forum I post on and I start a thread maybe once every three months if that, for years. I interface with people here the same way that I do everywhere else... poorly and from my own point of view. I am repeatedly accused of being sensational for the sake of it, trolling, attention-whoring...

(and can someone please calmly explain to me how making one thread, once in awhile where I express my disgusting thoughts, that no one at all has to read or respond to in any way is attention-whoring?)

Now I have people imploring others never to respond to me at all. Has it occurred to any of them that I'm an actual person? What if all of this is my authentic self in all of its miserable glory? What if there is some colossal failure of acceptance because it is felt that I am being deliberately unacceptable when I am merely incidentally so?

Its fucked up, and if my saying so is also attention-whoring then so be it.

[$iljanus]

It's 2:30ish in the morning my time so my apologies if this is not coherent.

8 pages.

The thread ran for 8 pages. In that thread there was humor, personal attacks, constructive advice, and a few tangents.

I was tempted to lock things earlier because of the rise of tensions but things seemed to calm down and I along with my fellow mods try to balance the need for maintaining forum etiquette with the desire to allow conversations to occur knowing that they may be a little heated at times.

I used my judgement that after, here's that number again, 8 pages it was time to stop because it looked like things were getting heated again and it was turning into the same old arguments that voiced before the 8 page mark. That was the point where maintaining forum etiquette became the issue.

Well now that the Dragon has been awakened I'm going to watch a couple of episodes of my quite nice Game of Thrones blu-ray DVD.

[Chesspieceface]

If it calms the dragon and for what it is worth: I was not criticizing your decision $iljanus.

I am saying that if there was a failure in my eyes, its allowing the massive piling-on (a moderator even joined) and making it my problem and mine alone and not one of moderation. It basically ensures that the next time I try to share anything, that the exact same thing will happen, or something derivative of this. And since I've had this happen again and again, and everyone thinks that I am trolling for the piling on and that I am seeking that kind of attention, which I am not... all I can conclude is that everyone else is enjoying this on some level. Because I'd sure like to have the discussions I start.

Isn't bombing my threads with rolley-eyes and negative comments just for existing somewhat unfair? Clearly certain posters would like me to leave, but staff hasn't asked me to... So is this the passive aggressive approach? Because, if you can't tell, it doesn't work very well on me.

I'm not suggesting that I should get special treatment, nor am I a victim. Its very unlikely that I am going to be changing in a way that pleases my detractors anytime soon. So how many more times do we want to do this?

[RuperT]

IMO, any mod who uses the phrase "attention whore" in earnest is overpaid.

[msduncan]

CPF, it's not real classy to send a PM to someone telling them to go fuck themselves either.

Well, unless it was meant in a sexy way.

[msduncan]

My big beef and partly the reason I started this thread in meta:

There was some interesting conversation in that thread. Because some individuals started using attacks or name calling, it got locked. I think this is a shame, and I think individuals should be warned privately to cease the name calling and subtle skirt-the-edges type provoking that goes on around here.

In the past year, some individuals have tried to label or infer that I was a bigot, racist, etc etc because of a stand I took in the Martin thread. I don't even want to bring up some of the goading and attempted provoking that happens at times by usually the same individuals over in the R&P forum. Those guys are experts at going right up to the line to get someone enraged but not officially crossing it.

If I did that crap to everyone I politically disagreed with on these forums it would be a full time job for me -- but what's worse is that I would probably be banned while those same characters would remain posting here freely for the next decade.

So mods, I urge you to think about the type of behavior you are allowing to happen here without any action. Sure, some of this stuff goes right up to the line without crossing it because people have become skilled at doing that. I don't think anyone should be banned, but I certainly think a PM to them saying 'dude, just please stop basically trolling certain individuals to try to get a response'. Instead stuff like this spirals out of control until the thread it locked, or Yellowking and I wind up raging for therapy in private messages to calm down because the goading behavior is ignored.

I still can't believe warnings weren't given out for some people in a couple select threasd like the Martin/Zimmerman one. There was outright name calling in some of those conversations.

[ImLawBoy]

My big beef and partly the reason I started this thread in meta:

There was some interesting conversation in that thread. Because some individuals started using attacks or name calling, it got locked.

I understand the concern and sympathize with the point. To be fair, we tried a few times to get things back on target, but it just wouldn't stay there. We did give it eight pages, so I feel that there was adequate time and space for people to air their thoughts, but the signal to noise ratio went too far in the bad direction, and didn't show any likelihood of letting up.

I think this is a shame, and I think individuals should be warned privately to cease the name calling and subtle skirt-the-edges type provoking that goes on around here.

First, you don't know what might be going on privately - that's because it's private. Second, it's typically more effective to make a public plea to keep things on track, since a single post will address the issue for everyone, and prevents others who didn't receive a private warning from jumping in and continuing attacks. (That's the theory, anyway. It doesn't always work, obviously.)

In the past year, some individuals have tried to label or infer that I was a bigot, racist, etc etc because of a stand I took in the Martin thread. I don't even want to bring up some of the goading and attempted provoking that happens at times by usually the same individuals over in the R&P forum. Those guys are experts at going right up to the line to get someone enraged but not officially crossing it.

If I did that crap to everyone I politically disagreed with on these forums it would be a full time job for me -- but what's worse is that I would probably be banned while those same characters would remain posting here freely for the next decade.

And now you've officially pissed me off. Don't take your issues with the political makeup of the forum out on the forum staff. We're a remarkably balanced group (probably leans more conservative than the general forum), and I think we've done a damn good job of not letting our political leanings get in the way of our moderating duties. The (non-spammer) folks who have been banned around these parts have been banned because of fairly spectacular outbursts or meltdowns that are quite independent of their political leanings (and it's not like we've been banning a lot of non-spammers). If you were to be banned for your interactions with those with whom you disagree, it would be because of your similar outburst/meltdown, and 100% on you.

So mods, I urge you to think about the type of behavior you are allowing to happen here without any action. Sure, some of this stuff goes right up to the line without crossing it because people have become skilled at doing that. I don't think anyone should be banned, but I certainly think a PM to them saying 'dude, just please stop basically trolling certain individuals to try to get a response'. Instead stuff like this spirals out of control until the thread it locked, or Yellowking and I wind up raging for therapy in private messages to calm down because the goading behavior is ignored.

I still can't believe warnings weren't given out for some people in a couple select threasd like the Martin/Zimmerman one. There was outright name calling in some of those conversations.

It's fair to ask us to reconsider how we look at these issues. I've definitely noticed over the years that we've gone more "hands off" on moderating than from our early days. Part of this is that we have fewer issues, since maturity has calmed many of us. Part of this is letting the community handle more of these issues, which they do a pretty good job of. Part of this is knowing that not all outbursts require staff action, as many of the issues resolve themselves when the party making the outburst has time to reconsider. Part of this, if I'm being truly honest, is probably a bit of laziness and/or conflict avoidance on our part. We could and should probably be a bit more vigilant.

All that said, I doubt we'll go back to being as vigilant as we once were, barring a serious and sustained downturn in forum etiquette. I've learned that coming down with the Hammer of the Mods on every instance of name calling isn't required to maintain the overall positive and civil tone of the forums. We still have a remarkably mature (both emotionally, and sadly physically) group of posters. We occasionally may go off the rails a bit, but the community tends to keep us going in the right direction in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Bottom line, I'm proud of the staff and how we handle conflicts on the forum. We've all goofed here and there, of course, and that's probably not going to change. We should take criticism like yours to heart, though, and make sure that we've got a relatively consistent approach to these types of issues going forward.

[msduncan]

I only have one thing to say.

Rip's a RHINO.

Just kidding Rip.

[Rip]

You busted me.

I am really Nancy Pelosi's ManHo.

I only post here when she is away working. The rest of the time she keeps me chained up at the foot of her bed.

[Odin]

Oh and I get called a fake and a fraud by a moderator who doesn't respond to PM's telling them to fuck themselves.

To treat the people who volunteer their time to moderate these forums for us that way is reprehensible. If that's the way you're going to behave, by all means to find those other fifteen people to chat with, because such an attitude is utterly and completely out of sync with the rest of this community.

[Daehawk]

I come across as one of those people..the ones who get called many things when I post something...but that's life and in the world Im a nice guy.

[The Meal]

I come across as one of those people..the ones who get called many things when I post something...but that's life and in the world Im a nice guy.

I think it's two different things. CPF is out of sync with the majority of forum users, and knows it. At times he defines himself as someone who is out of sync. He goes back and forth with how that affects his reality. At times he uses his out-of-sync'ness to be a mischievous contrarian. At other times he uses his out-of-sync'ness as reasoning for what he does or as an immutable definition of who he is. I think the connection is formed (by CPF) that these two ideas are in sync and that because of the second, he's got free reign to do the first. The folks who are in sync realize there's a disconnect between those ideas.

Daehawk, I think it easy to believe you're a nice guy in person. I think that you're less out-of-sync with the community than you are out of sync with a few folks on the community. Believe it or not, you're not the only one who has a few folks with whom, for whatever reason, you simply don't quite get along. We've all got our own idiosyncrasies and tendencies and traits that are going to be bothersome to some other people. (And there are idiosyncrasies and tendencies out there for which I find difficulty conjuring up empathy as well.) It may well feel like the majority of the forum is out to get you (and for certain topics that will be the case, in which case you may want to spend some time evaluating your feelings on those topics or how you communicate those feelings on the boards — assuming you don't like playing the role of the heel, of course), but I think it's natural for some folks to feel more persecuted than is actually the case.

But what do I know? I've got plenty of my own issues.

[Peacedog]

Is it just me or has every banning and major issue here boiled down to a squad of moralists coming down on someone and continually calling in reinforcements till that person explodes?

You are mistaken. It isn't even true that every banning and major issue here looked like this, though it is true that for some people some of them would look like this. If any of the people who PM'd you to talk about Triggercut being a bully suggest otherwise, then they too are mistaken.

Is your thinking this part of the show?

[Blackhawk]

I seem to recall at least a couple of instances where that happened and it was the moralists who got banned.

Part of this is that we have fewer issues, since maturity has calmed many of us. Part of this is letting the community handle more of these issues, which they do a pretty good job of. Part of this...[snip]

...and the rest of it was me retiring from staff.

[Rip]

I seem to recall at least a couple of instances where that happened and it was the moralists who got banned.

Part of this is that we have fewer issues, since maturity has calmed many of us. Part of this is letting the community handle more of these issues, which they do a pretty good job of. Part of this...[snip]

...and the rest of it was me retiring from staff.

That may be, however we have steadfastly refused to remove your statue.

[hentzau]

I seem to recall at least a couple of instances where that happened and it was the moralists who got banned.

Part of this is that we have fewer issues, since maturity has calmed many of us. Part of this is letting the community handle more of these issues, which they do a pretty good job of. Part of this...[snip]

...and the rest of it was me retiring from staff.

That may be, however we have steadfastly refused to remove your statue.

NOW I know where to dig for the secret stash of OO wealth!

[Daehawk]

Daehawk, I think it easy to believe you're a nice guy in person. I think that you're less out-of-sync with the community than you are out of sync with a few folks on the community. Believe it or not, you're not the only one who has a few folks with whom, for whatever reason, you simply don't quite get along. We've all got our own idiosyncrasies and tendencies and traits that are going to be bothersome to some other people. (And there are idiosyncrasies and tendencies out there for which I find difficulty conjuring up empathy as well.) It may well feel like the majority of the forum is out to get you (and for certain topics that will be the case, in which case you may want to spend some time evaluating your feelings on those topics or how you communicate those feelings on the boards — assuming you don't like playing the role of the heel, of course), but I think it's natural for some folks to feel more persecuted than is actually the case.

Thank you. I have a tendency to feel as though the whole place and everyone is against me. I know that's not true but it is a failing of mine. I love praise and dont take negatives well at all. It's a failing. I appreciate your thoughts on it. Like when i want to play MP games with others on the board I worry that no one will want to or that when they do it's a roll their eyes behind me back sorta thing. Im insecure it seems

Theres a few I know hate me but I dont know why. Shrug. Life I suppose. As for cpf I cant judge. I try not to judge based on some forum posts. I dont follow anyone actually and keep up with who said what and when. Hell I can have a big blow up with someone and months later completely have forgotten about it and be all nice and friendly with them again until they are asses again. I've even traded with people I dont necessarily get along with. Good trades too.

[Zarathud]

That's just what they WANT you to think. The rest of us know JeffV ran off with the OO jewels months ago....