Subject: No, Hedgehog is right
Author:
Posted on: 2014-03-30 15:37:00 UTC
My point, while technically correct, was presented in a way that was far from polite. I was too harsh. I have apologized further up the thread.
-Phobos, who is not, nor has he ever been, the Nameless Admin
-- Nameless Admin here. DrMarble: Don't use language like that. Ever.
I geuss Ill just leave again if dont want me around ;-; sorry
I was, I think, too harsh. Please, feel free to stay, if you like.
I will, however, reiterate my point about watching your language in the future. It was uncalled for to use that kind of language; doubly so because it was in all caps and in the title of the post. This is a family friendly Board.
-Phobos
Its fine. Its just been awhile and I didnt know/remember that swearing wasnt allowed. And I meant it in a joking way, I wasnt trying to be offensive. Lets just forget about all this.
I, for one, think Phobos telling you to leave was in bad taste.
The Emperor Protects!
It's not like people, don't want you around, they just want you to be polite
The Nameless Admin has already wiped out the contents of the original post, but now I'm morbidly curious about exactly what sort of offensive content a returnbie announcement post contained to merit said post's text being removed. I might be setting up a false ranking system, thinking that anything up to a certain rank of awfulness would just have the thread deleted rather than just the text wiped clean, but could someone give a brief overview for those who came in late?
The post was originally textless - but the subject line contained, in all caps, that wonderful word for a girl dog. It now appears to be an [ahem] from the Nameless Admin, who also left a note inside the post for DrMarble.
I was imagining that something much worse had been said. Not to say that what had been said was acceptable, because it certainly was not, but I've only heard of the Nameless Admin interfering directly(in ways that don't involve the removal of spam or other Board backwash, at least) a handful of times, and I'd projected that him or her getting involved in this case would imply the presence of something really nasty. Instead, it was just a supremely insensitive word in capital letters in the subject line. A little anticlimactic, given what I'd expected, but it definitely makes sense that the action was taken.
Suffice to say, s/he appears only when there's stuff to be edited or deleted on the Board.
If you truly wish to know, you must travel to the distant lands of Wechi. There, you must find and tame a wild ypur, on the edges of the ancient stampede grounds. The truth you seek is located near that place.
That said, I can also offer you some comments: The Nameless Admin is one of us, and has been with us for a significant period of time. I'm afraid I cannot provide attribution to this quote - I want to say it was hS, but I'm not certain: "Admins make great janitors and terrible dictators".
Thus why The Nameless Admin uses an alias - it allows them to show up and clean up the Board when it needs it, and makes people less likely to immediately associate them-the-Boarder with admin powers, and thus authority. It's more of a legal fiction than a closely-guarded secret.
Ok, I have to admit, that is pretty awesome XD
I don't think I actually said it, but I'm going to claim it because it's awesome.
hS
"12. The PPC community is kid-, family- and work-friendly — make sure it stays that way. That means no cursing, no graphic violence, sex or whatever. If you feel you have to break this rule, please give a specific warning (and remember, just because you don’t have a problem with something, doesn’t mean others won’t). The PPC shared universe is also kid-, family- and work-friendly, but in this case the rule is to warn for anything that raises your rating, rather than necessarily cutting it out."
I.E nothing of telling people who have just returned (and who are probably excited to see what has been happening) to watch their language or go. That violates Article 7, which reads;
"7. If someone says something that seems offensive, but you’re not sure exactly what they meant, ASK them first, before jumping down their throats. Astonishingly enough, most people aren’t out to offend anyone. (If they are being deliberately insulting, believe me, you’ll have a lot of backup.) Don't be afraid to ask what someone meant- it isn't silly to want the full facts."
I.E if someone breaks the Constitution, don't jump down their throats by telling them to leave. This also breaks Article 9, which reads;
"9. The PPC as a community is responsible for upholding the Constitution. If you see someone breaking any of the rules and guidelines herein, please ask them to stop (politely- remember Article 7!) and explain why. If this doesn't resolve the situation, you will be backed up - and if it continues, a persistent rule-breaker should be shunned or asked to leave. (If you're being accused of breaking a rule, take a step back and, if you are in the wrong, stop, apologise, and move on. Grudges are no fun!)"
I.E warn breakers of the Constitution POLITELY that they are breaking the Constitution. Telling someone to leave is not polite.
The Emperor Protects!
Number 12 specifically says no swearing, and even if the minor swears are somewhat acceptable, which I've seen varying evidence both supporting and denying, that's no excuse for putting a mid-tier swear word out in the subject line, where there's not any opportunity for a language warning. That's essentially both an indisputable rule that DrMarble has broken and a social line that he or she has crossed.
To refute your other two article selections, Article 7 is basically irrelevant here. DrMarble was not being offensive for some reason that would allow an opportunity for explanation or rationalization. The message was three words long, and the swear word was used as an unneeded attachment to a message that would have meant the same thing without it. If the swear word had been removed and an apostrophe had been placed between the I and M of the first word, the message would have held the same meaning with nothing being lost and both proper grammar and further sensitivity gained.
Article 9 is less easy to refute as being attached to the situation, since it does concern reactions to someone breaking the rules, but while Phobos was not being polite, he was also not being disproportionately mean. Careless use of bad language should come coupled with a warning to cease that bad language, and if Phobos wanted to go at it from the angle of "you just got back here, and you're not going to be an acceptable presence if you keep talking like that", he's within his rights to do so. Again, this is the selected article most connected to the situation, since it is likely that there were more polite options that could have been chosen, but none of them would have been as direct and effective(save the supremely direct actions undertaken by the Nameless Admin, of course, but I doubt that Phobos and the Nameless Admin are the same person, so he would not have had that power).
My point, while technically correct, was presented in a way that was far from polite. I was too harsh. I have apologized further up the thread.
-Phobos, who is not, nor has he ever been, the Nameless Admin