Thread: Martin PC Not suspension? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=024261

Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
RooK, I do most earnestly hope you were joking with your suspension of Martin PC Not just now.

His posts were clearly in jest and went along with the fun of that Hell thread.

Please tell me your "suspension" is in jest as well. Please?
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
I presume the Morse code translates to the 6th commandment violation. So if they want to enforce the laws they have the right. However, the specifics of the situation - hosts messing with Martin's posts by removing vowels - might seem to the average reader as instigating an intemperate response, and might thus warrant more latitude. I'm reminded of children who are observed to push others on the playground, with that punished, but the behaviour of the pushed child not taken into account when the pusher is punished. The situation there is often one of empathy and the manifestly unfair response of teachers merely accepted.

I do think some discussion is warranted if this is indeed a suspension, or as seems to be threatened in the relevant Hell thread, worse. One interpretation of this situation would be sitting on someone after poking them and instigating a response.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
I also find this disturbing. the whole of the hostly activity on the thread, actually. it's bullying, and bullying breeds rebellion. If I had been treated as Martin was in Hell I'd probably also have acted out. I've tried to hush up and let you guys have your fun and let it go - especially as Martin has had a good sense of humor about it. But it's bullying, plain and simple, and I'm disgusted.

I say this as someone who was often called on the carpet for being a nasty hellhost. I know - I can be one mean bitch sometimes. But I at least see a pretty big line between verbal abuse and using your power to take away a person's ability to communicate and defend themselves in that setting.

Martin's writing can be challenging for those used to reading at the level of ten year olds, but a little effort brings great payoffs - he has a lot to say and says it beautifully. Since when does the Ship discourage communication on a highly complex level? I thought we took pride in that. This is the first time I've ever seen anyone asked to dumb down for the sake of the hosts. It's a precedent that gives me a chill.

And when do we suspend without giving a warning first?

[ 29. September 2012, 15:46: Message edited by: comet ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Perhaps Martin will take the chance to contemplate his manifold sins and wickedness and, when he is allowed back into the Fold of the Righteous he will post with clarity, as he has shown he can but often chooses not to, presumably for his own amusement. It is not amusement for the poor Hosts who have to read every word and have, I think, been remarkably tolerant and shown great restraint.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Perhaps Martin will take the chance to contemplate his manifold sins and wickedness and, when he is allowed back into the Fold of the Righteous he will post with clarity, as he has shown he can but often chooses not to, presumably for his own amusement. It is not amusement for the poor Hosts who have to read every word and have, I think, been remarkably tolerant and shown great restraint.

are we going to suspend* everyone who is a crappy communicator or obtuse, intentionally or not? (and I don't think he does it intentionally, for the record) then we have a long ass list to get started on. you know as well as I do that there are a lot of people the hosts "have to" read that cause sprains from the eye rolls. I don't think this is a valid reason for a concerted campaign of abusing power to take away someone's ability to communicate. one disemvoweling is cute. after that, it's mean.

As for the poor hosts - I would remind you guys that you're volunteers. you have chosen this job and if it becomes too much of a hardship you can step down. You don't rely on this for your income. it's supposed to be something fun and enjoyable. if the gig causes such suffering, step down.


*yes, I know this was not the official reasoning for his suspension.

[ 29. September 2012, 15:55: Message edited by: comet ]
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
Oh, so the Ship is for the ease and pleasure of the hosts? I would hope even the hosts would reject that.

I've long enjoyed Martin's posting style. The ship would be a lesser place without it.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
I believe he was warned here. I felt the hosting was a tad harsh but Martin is a grown-up and can play by the rules just like the rest of us. Not all of his cryptic posts that some people are so agog over were these amazing pieces of literature either.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
thank you, Prestor John, I missed that warning. Fair enough. but now I'm baffled on that warning - I'm completely missing the C6 violation in RooK's quoted text.
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
The Morse code translates to RooK's second quotation on his post.
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
I've read RooK's warning which in part told Martin... "So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

So he's pretty much told to change his posting style or be suspended. That is bull shit. [Mad]
 
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :
 
Yes, it does seem as though Martin was being deliberately baited. This whole test business was daft in the first place, I'm afraid, so to circumvent it is hardly showing disrespect to the Hosts. IMNSVHO, of course.
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
Hang on, no. I reckoned and still reckon that Martin was baiting everyone by his deliberately - and he's proved it was deliberate by his posting over the last few days - gnomic utterances.
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
I don't believe he was being deliberately baited at all. He was asked on one particular thread to comply with a ruling, capricious or not, that's an accepted part of Hell. He wasn't asked to comply with that ruling anywhere else on the boards. He could have walked away from the Hell thread at any time. Instead he decided to give the hosts what amounts to a two-fingered salute. That was his decision.

Yes, the hosts run out of patience sometimes. I don't know how they put up with him for so long - he's shown he's perfectly capable of posting clearly when he wants, but it came across to me like someone playing a long-term game on the boards to appear deliberately cryptic.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
Problem is, even when he complied with posts that were clear and readable he was punished for those as well, which just ain't right. I will admit Martin pushed his luck with the morse code when he knew full well the hell hosts had it in for him on a level I've not seen. And right after Rook's warning. I'm just glad Rook didn't ban him as he'd threatened.
 
Posted by Leaf (# 14169) on :
 
I'm a little surprised at the handwringing over Martin PC Not's suspension. ISTM Martin's posts were wandering around in a grey zone between mischievous and douchey, and the Admin called the latter. It wasn't that wise of Martin to traipse around in that territory, given the previous Host warning.

Yes, the initial requirement of Martin was capricious and arbitrary. That is the tone that has been set for hosting in Hell. I actually appreciate it. I find it philosophically helpful and sobering to remember that Hellish regimes are capricious and arbitrary. It reminds me of The Good Soldier Šjevk in which a pubkeeper cleaning a portrait of the emperor remarks that flies shit on the emperor's face, and is imprisoned for the remark. However innocent or mischievous an intended remark, Hell is an oppressive place, and reason and mercy do not find a safe home there.
 
Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
quote:
I'm a little surprised at the handwringing over Martin PC Not's suspension. ISTM Martin's posts were wandering around in a grey zone between mischievous and douchey, and the Admin called the latter. It wasn't that wise of Martin to traipse around in that territory, given the previous Host warning.
I agree with Leaf.
 
Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
I agree with comet.

I thought the Hellhosts were being capricious and bullying--both with the 'testing' and with the disemvowelling. Hell is too important a part of SoF--as a place for conversations that couldn't be had on other parts of the board--to be messed about with in this way.
It was not what Erin would have done. She might have reamed Martin a new asshole, she might have suspended him, but she wouldn't have goaded him and toyed with him in that way.

[ 29. September 2012, 16:54: Message edited by: Amos ]
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
But Erin could suspend people. The Hell hosts can't. It takes an admin to do so.
 
Posted by Siegfried (# 29) on :
 
Martin has been on the ship long enough to know where the bounds are. And I've always felt his obscure and obfuscated posting style was deliberate. *shrug*
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
I can't say I agree re Erin. She regularly gave people enough rope to hang themselves with.

I wasn't particularly a fan of limiting Martin's flesch kincaid posting level either. I've had to write to that level enough for work that I know how often comprehensible postings come up as well above 5.0. Thing is? I'm not a hell host. Doublethink is. I sucked as a hell host when I got to be one for a host and admin's day courtesy some admin who decided to accept requests. Doublethink acted capriciously and not kindly. Welp, she's a hell host. I didn't like the way that thread went, so I didn't post in it. I didn't understand why Martin didn't do the same. If he'd made a Styx thread to discuss the flesch kincaid ruling and objected clearly, it might have gone differently. Of course, if he were the kind of poster who would be likely to do so, Doublethink wouldn't have been tempted to impose the reading level ruling in the first place.
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
I've seen the Hell hosts being capricious while at the same time asserting their authority many times. That's not easy to do, and I respect it a lot when they pull it off.

However, part of capricious humour is giving the other some room to respond in the same spirit. This is what makes it fun: it restores a sense of equality and prevents it from developing into a power trip. Capricious humour never works when one side has all the power.

At H&A day, Hosts are powerful and capricious. They could change my avatar any time, just because they can. But they'd also allow me to make fun of them back. This two-sidedness is what makes it fun. And I believe that this two-sidedness was absent on this Hell thread.
 
Posted by Loquacious beachcomber (# 8783) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
I also find this disturbing. the whole of the hostly activity on the thread, actually. it's bullying,

Respectfully, I disagree; bullying takes place when one can not escape the situation, such in the schoolyard or at work when one needs to make a living.
As a visitor to a talkpage site, one can withdraw from the community, particularly after trying to resolve the matter in the Styx.
Leaving an online community is a sad choice to be faced with, but it is an available form of escape from the situation, so I don't see any action on this website as bullying.
Even when I don't like certain actions at times.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:

As a visitor to a talkpage site, one can withdraw from the community, particularly after trying to resolve the matter in the Styx.
Leaving an online community is a sad choice to be faced with, but it is an available form of escape from the situation, so I don't see any action on this website as bullying.

I don't see the actions here as bullying either. But it's surprising how painful it is to leave a board one visits every day. I left one some time ago (due to a form of bullying) and it was a huge wrench at the time.
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
I thought Martin had been suspended, not planked. Surely he - and indeed the rest of us - can live without the Ship for a couple of weeks?
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
Well I think this is sad. I thought Doublethink was, not bullying so much as just teasing Martin a little bit about his posting style. I didn't have much real trouble understanding his posts. Occasionally they were slightly obtuse but at other times, as he might say, they were sublime.


So I was stunned to see what I was watching as a bit of fun turn into a suspension. I think RooK took it to a level unintended by DT. Only she can tell us.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
I never intended to claim authority on the textbook definition of bullying. I was clear that my post was based on my opinion and my perspective. That being said,
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
bullying takes place when one can not escape the situation, such in the schoolyard or at work when one needs to make a living.
As a visitor to a talkpage site, one can withdraw from the community, particularly after trying to resolve the matter in the Styx.
Leaving an online community is a sad choice to be faced with, but it is an available form of escape from the situation, so I don't see any action on this website as bullying.
Even when I don't like certain actions at times.

I see nothing in here about the ability to escape.
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Siegfried:
Martin has been on the ship long enough to know where the bounds are. And I've always felt his obscure and obfuscated posting style was deliberate. *shrug*

So what if it's deliberate?
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Here is the adult version. I agree - there is nothing about the ability to escape.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Forget about bullying, that's a symptom. I've always understood the guiding principle here to be "Don't be a jerk".

I can't agree with comet that "Martin PC Not" writes beautifully. He is however utterly unique and writes creatively, but not always intelligibly. If you are in a debating forum it's up to you to present your arguments and statements in an comprehensible form. If he wants to write poetic fantasy, I'd suggest it ought to be in Heaven or The Circus.

He's had a slap and I he comes back soon, with things I can understand!
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I think RooK took it to a level unintended by DT.

I think Martin took it to that level. He could have posted in the Styx and made perfectly valid points about Flesch-Kincaid there. He chose not to do that. I suppose he may have felt that it was a very literalist ruling, and hence that a response adhering to the letter and not the spirit was OK. But he is surely smart enough to know that he was pushing his luck.
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
There is an absence thus far of host/admin comment and discussion. Makes me fear the change management pattern, where the non-powered group gets to air all of their ideas and comments, followed by pronouncement of how it is. Better from the perspective of a shipmate before the mast would be comment sooner from the quarterdeck
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Forget about bullying, that's a symptom. I've always understood the guiding principle here to be "Don't be a jerk".

I don't feel I can "forget" about bullying. By saying it's a symptom, are you essentially saying he had it coming? I strongly disagree.

It's obviously a matter of varying opinion on whether Martin was purposefully being a jerk. I know I'm a pollyanna; but I don't see him trying to be a dickhead. playing along, yes. even being cheeky where he probably shouldn't have, granted. And after seeing RooK's warning, I see where the suspension was warranted - on the Respecting The Admins level. The jerkishness I see here, within the Hell thread, is on the part of hosts. It takes a lot to cross that line in Hell, but I feel it was crossed. I'm all for a lively hellhost eviscerating. This went beyond that to obstructing a Shipmate's ability to communicate and defend themselves, however elegantly you feel they are capable of doing it.

an another level, I find it a bit offensive that we expect shipmates to dumb down their writing to a reading level equated with children or be punished for it. Aren't we meant to be generally educated adults? I'm the high school drop out, here. I'm willing to put in some work to understand what my fellow posters are saying, why aren't others?

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I can't agree with comet that "Martin PC Not" writes beautifully.

"beautifully" applied to content rather than readability. I often have to read Martin's posts over a few times to absorb them. he has moments of beautiful writing, but he regularly expresses meaning beautifully.

My 11 year old is tackling the Lord of the Rings. he finds the language difficult. I encourage him to put the effort in and persevere; the story is worth it. I feel that way about Martin's posts.

for the record, this post is a Flesch Kinkaid Reading level of 7.66, and according to Doublethink's criteria for Martin in Hell, is a candidate for disemvoweling. I'm fairly certain you all can read this. an arbitrary reading level criteria will not make someone a more direct communicator.

some messages, you have to work for.
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
There is an absence thus far of host/admin comment and discussion. Makes me fear the change management pattern, where the non-powered group gets to air all of their ideas and comments, followed by pronouncement of how it is. Better from the perspective of a shipmate before the mast would be comment sooner from the quarterdeck

Watch out. This post is less comprehensible than most of Martin's.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
on second thought - snide and juvenile comment removed.

I apologize.

[ 29. September 2012, 19:21: Message edited by: comet ]
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
I think a very bad decision has been made. I don't think anyone believes there is anything unkind or malicious or destructive about Martin. It looks to me like a decision taken simply in order to win a fight. An unnecessary fight. A fight started by a host. A fight that I'm not sure Martin realised he was caught up in - he was still just busy being himself.

It's a sad day.
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
Martin had the opportunity to question his treatment in Hell many times over the last while in the Styx. He chose not to.

Instead he continued to complain of his treatment in the Hell threads he posted on (and DH too) with multiple C6 violations.

If RooK snapped (and I, for one, don't think he did) then he snapped after displaying forbearance.
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
If RooK snapped (and I, for one, don't think he did) then he snapped after displaying forbearance.

Rubbish. RooK's absurd warning, particularly the portion I quoted above, is hardly forbearing.

RooK is being a tyrant.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
The jerkishness I see here, within the Hell thread, is on the part of hosts. It takes a lot to cross that line in Hell, but I feel it was crossed. I'm all for a lively hellhost eviscerating. This went beyond that to obstructing a Shipmate's ability to communicate and defend themselves, however elegantly you feel they are capable of doing it.

The argument on the other thread in the Styx was that Martin is perfectly capable of communicating clearly when he feels like it, so he was prevented from communicating in his preferred style, but not prevented from communicating at all. And I do think that's true. He could have posted with simple clarity.

But I don't see why he should have been required to do so in Hell. The recurring problem with Martin's posts, the things he's been warned about in the past, is that it's a lot of work for the hosts to make out whether or not he's insulting people. But in Hell that's not an issue, since Hell is where you're supposed to take your insults.

So why did Doublethink impose an arbitrary readability rule on Martin? She gave no reason at the time. When the inquiry was made in the Styx, RooK's defense cited Martin's behavior in Dead Horses. But if Martin deserved a penalty for his behavior there, he should have been suspended, not played with because Hellhost felt like it. Then Doublethink came on the scene and said that she did it because of the "long term issue we have with the comprehensibility of Martin's posts." But it's not up to hosts to deal with recurring problems. Their duty is to keep the boards running smoothly on a day-to-day basis. If Martin is creating so much trouble for the hosts, it's up to the admins to deal with him, not for the hosts to take matters into their own hands.

Given that the admins didn't act, however, and allowed Doublethink to edit Martin's posts, I think suspending Martin for his response to that editing was wrong. The case for suspending him could have easily been made on the basis of his failure to comply with warnings he's been given in the past. But the administrative structure of the Ship did not work as it should, and Martin played along with Doublethink's antics, and for that he got suspended. Not fair.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
on the question of "readability" - I'm still very troubled by all of this.

Thing is, I don't want this dumbed down. not ever. It's difficult and messy and elegant. Do we really want Martin to edit something like that down to the comfortable and unoffensive reading level of a ten year old?

I'm struggling with any concept of faith anymore. Frankly, most of what I read around here does not instill in me any wish to return to the fold. But there are two posters who regularly make me hope that there is some truth in all of this bullshit. that make me want to believe in the magic and love of it all. One of them is Martin. When he posts, I go seek it out. Hell yes, I have to work for it. but the payoff is worth every moment.

a while back he had some treatise on helping the homeless, the drunks, the generally disaffected. He didn't toot his horn as some sort of noble christian; hell, he complained about how damned hard and thankless it is. He talked about people who take and then want more. he talked about even being in physical danger. But he also somehow in all of that reminded me about WHY WE ARE HERE - to try and help pull each other out of the muck.

And so the next day I volunteered a little of my time and gas and grocery money to give a ride to a local guy who needs a lot of help. He smells. he complains about how the world wronged him. he never seeks out work. He's a total pain in the ass. But he deserves his chances, too. So I gave him a ride to the store, gave him some money. listened to him pulling his eeyore routine. aired out my car afterwards. It was a little thing, but I at least gave a start - and I did it because Martin reminded me to get off my high horse and get to work and quit fucking judging others when I have no idea what sort of monsters hide underneath their virtual beds. (I'm pretty sure Josh doesn't have a bed, actually)

Martin conveyed this to me in a very long, clunky, and grammatically messy post that quite a few people probably skimmed over.

But it kicked me in the ass. He regularly kicks me in the ass. He is one of the few on this site who I say regularly walks the walk - his ramblings actually makes me think of what Jesus might be tying to get through to us all. After all, isn't that what it's all supposed to be about?

so okay, we enforce a conformity of language and culture and then none of us have to actually work for understanding. But then we are less.

Jesus didn't make his people comfortable. probably freaked them right the fuck out. Thankfully, they listened anyway. There is something to learn in listening to the really challenging bits.

We have had to give other people the boot either temporarily or permanently in the past. this is the first example I have seen where that action grew out of trying to force someone to communicate in a way that we find more comfortable and less challenging. it says something about a change in Ship values that I find very disturbing.

The further this thread goes along the more I am tempted towards saying things that could be hurtful, overly personal, and not helpful, so I'm bowing out. I do hope the hosts and admins take our concerns into serious consideration.

Thank you.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
I agree with Ruth.

This quickly chosen sentence prom the preface of Henry James' What Maisie Knew got a 29.41 on the FK scale.

quote:
All this would be to say, I at once recognised, that my light vessel of consciousness, swaying in such a draught, couldn't be with verisimilitude a rude little boy; since, beyond the fact that little boys are never so "present," the sensibility of the female young is indubitably, for early youth, the greater, and my plan would call, on the part of my protagonist, for "no end" of sensibility.

 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
Thank you, Comet (although I'd rather you'd not bow out of this discussion).

By the way, have Comet, Ruth, and I ever agreed on anything before? Ever?
 
Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
I've stayed out of this because at first, although I felt that Doublethink's action was a bit naughty and possibly a bit close to the line, I still grinned a little....in a guilty pleasure sort of way. I found it funny too that Martin was able to subvert the thing. But as it went on I actually started to feel a bit uncomfortable. So now, seeing what's transpired with a suspension I feel very uncomfortable and a sense that something that might have been a joke with a sharpened point has turned into something totally unnecessary. I'd just like to add my voice to the dissent. I think you've gone too far.
 
Posted by comet (# 10353) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Thank you, Comet (although I'd rather you'd not bow out of this discussion).

By the way, have Comet, Ruth, and I ever agreed on anything before? Ever?

[Big Grin] had that thought myself. there's a first for everything, Punk!
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
Comet, you've turned a complaint into a parable of the kingdom.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
On reflection, reading comet's reply and RuthW's post (and not others) .... I'm not sure any more. I can see why Martin might still be on board but also, as he was walking the gunwales, why he is now overboard. I do however find him immensely frustrating, because I'm convinced he can be just as effective using far simpler language; but then I prefer Hemingway to Henry James.

I'd be disappointed if there hadn't been behind the scenes PMs from the Admins to Martin PC trying to take the heat out of the situation. [Frown]
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
I would say that pretty much everyone who has ever been a Hellhost has gone completely OTT from time to time – as far as I could tell (though, often it turns out there was a back story I'd missed).

In comparison, we have here a story of someone who, though delightful in many ways, and occasionally inspiring, has a persist record of being apparently deliberately obscure and difficult. Now, I recognise, that the FKG is a deeply inadequate measure of readability, and I'm sure Doublethink does too, but Martin has been asked to be less obscure in the past and, for want of a reliable measure, those requests have got nowhere.

In Hell, he was given a very specific hostly warning – and it was clearly a hostly warning, albeit fairly light-hearted. He did not dispute the hostly warning in the Styx but he did flout it, and took the consequences, which then caused others to protest in the Styx. But, despite the debate in the Styx, he want on challenging the ruling in Hell. The consequences were utterly predictable.

Martin is very much a grown up and, I suspect, not easily bullied. He enjoys a joke – and he wouldn't be the first – and probably won't be the last – to recognise that dangerous jokes are the funniest jokes of all. He went down in flames and I'm sure he will rise again from the ashes. For my money, the hand-wringing is overdone, though I hope Martin can still enjoy it.
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Thank you, Comet (although I'd rather you'd not bow out of this discussion).

Agreed. Completely. You've kept me going at times when I've lost it, just like you attribute to others.

There is more to communication than the meaning, difficult ideas often require difficult phrasings and words, and sometimes the manner of communication is the message. I agree with you Comet, that sometimes that's the point, it's how things are said that touch us. Well certainly me.

On further reflection after a ramble along the river with the dogs, I'm struck with the de-vowelling of Martin's posts, so as to make them incomprehensible, but apparently taken as a game. The game then extended as sparring and teasing continued with the readability scores. Then someone comes along and says it isn't a game any more. When exactly did the game stop and the serious stuff start? It certainly cannot be contributed to by use of languages other than English with the Morse code, given the de-vowelling turns English into gibberish.
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
In the interests of speaking up for what I perceive as fairness, I too would like to add my voice to the dissent. Much to my surprise I find myself in total agreement with Comet.
 
Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
I also find this disturbing. the whole of the hostly activity on the thread, actually. it's bullying,

Respectfully, I disagree; bullying takes place when one can not escape the situation, such in the schoolyard or at work when one needs to make a living.
As a visitor to a talkpage site, one can withdraw from the community, particularly after trying to resolve the matter in the Styx.
Leaving an online community is a sad choice to be faced with, but it is an available form of escape from the situation, so I don't see any action on this website as bullying.
Even when I don't like certain actions at times.

I suspect verbiage-ism is as hurtful as age-ism and vice-a-versa. I have noted your absence LB.
I know we all have our own buttons. And both on board as in real life, there are times when I wish I hadn't responded and just walked away. The fun thing is our buttons vary on our life circumstances including sleep deprivation. My memory says RooK is changing nappies and not sleeping much at the moment. My guess is he is exhausted. LB is hurting, I suspect about the ageist crap which pushed his buttons. And for me, I don't like generalizations about certain professions despite making them myself about others in the past. [Roll Eyes] So I think the point LB was making was to apply the same inaccurate yardstick to this situation that was recently applied to his own.
Bu then again, I may be wrong.
 
Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on :
 
Me too, and I've sent my own pot shots at Martin in the past. The thing that stood out was that about Martin actually walking the walk. He's one of the few that do.

I'm sure he'll be back in a few weeks, but we'll be poorer without him in the meantime.

(x-post, was agreeing with evangeline)

[ 29. September 2012, 22:21: Message edited by: goperryrevs ]
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
Not quite sure how excluding people ever really helps.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
The jerkishness I see here, within the Hell thread, is on the part of hosts. It takes a lot to cross that line in Hell, but I feel it was crossed. I'm all for a lively hellhost eviscerating. This went beyond that to obstructing a Shipmate's ability to communicate and defend themselves, however elegantly you feel they are capable of doing it.

The argument on the other thread in the Styx was that Martin is perfectly capable of communicating clearly when he feels like it, so he was prevented from communicating in his preferred style, but not prevented from communicating at all. And I do think that's true. He could have posted with simple clarity.


But he had later posts that were clear and that were disemvoweled anyway. That was inexcusable and just plain mean vindictiveness. In other words, being a jerk. Which is supposed to be a C violation.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
Are we even discussing Martin's suspension any more? The guy who has been unfairly prevented from participating for an unknown length of time, just because I hope to delay a couple Hosts from gouging their own eyes out? Because that's the rotten heart of it, and has fuck-all to do with fairness.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Are we even discussing Martin's suspension any more? The guy who has been unfairly prevented from participating for an unknown length of time, just because I hope to delay a couple Hosts from gouging their own eyes out? Because that's the rotten heart of it, and has fuck-all to do with fairness.

While I consider the provoking wrong, the suspension was right IMO because Martin pushed the envelope of a Command violation after being warned. The end situation was justified, but came about because unfairness. Perhaps the Hosts in question need some chocolate and a well deserved break from the stress of duties to regain a sense of peace and zen? Hell can be, well, hell and lead to the same behaviors on the part of hosts that is barred by shipmates.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
Yes, RooK, we are still discussing that. It's a shame you don't have enough respect for shipmates to do more than give them all the middle finger.

That Martin made hosts crazy is reason enough for his suspension. But the way it came about was wrong, and process matters.

[ 30. September 2012, 03:17: Message edited by: RuthW ]
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Are we even discussing Martin's suspension any more?

That's rather obvious isn't it? You do not want us to? Is this now not permitted? The tone of your post seems to suggest this. But we are asking about the decision, and the apparent shut-down tone doesn't answer.

quote:
RooK:
The guy who has been unfairly prevented from participating for an unknown length of time, just because I hope to delay a couple Hosts from gouging their own eyes out? Because that's the rotten heart of it, and has fuck-all to do with fairness.

If people are preparing to gouge their eyes in response to what is present in the thread in question, pray tell why they played a game with it re vowels and reading level. Or perhaps they would care to explain. It does not follow. You don't play when you're that distraught.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
It's a shame you don't have enough respect for shipmates to do more than give them all the middle finger.

Well, I wouldn't want to shock them by suddenly treating them differently than usual. They might all suddenly realize that I'm human and therefore edible.

quote:
But the way it came about was wrong, and process matters.
I will agree that it was not particularly fair.
But I'll also demur that fairness is not really the hallmark of Hell.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
That's rather obvious isn't it?

Actually, no. It seemed to be more about Doublethink's goading rather than Martin's decision to post something that would get him suspended.

quote:
If people are preparing to gouge their eyes in response to what is present in the thread in question, pray tell why they played a game with it re vowels and reading level. Or perhaps they would care to explain. It does not follow. You don't play when you're that distraught.
There are more than one thread/board in question, and Doublethink is hardly the Speaker For The Mods. She's just the amusingly malicious Hellhost that found a way to provoke Martin in a karmically appropriate manner.

Martin's lack of acknowledgement of my earlier warning in Dead Horses had me worried that he wasn't going to even try to work with me. So I was a hair-trigger, and that's not Doublethink's fault.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
unfairly prevented from participating for an unknown length of time

I think the fact that the length of time is unknown is particularly unfair.

I would like it to be made known to everybody.
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
]I will agree that it was not particularly fair.
But I'll also demur that fairness is not really the hallmark of Hell. ...


There are more than one thread/board in question, and Doublethink is hardly the Speaker For The Mods. She's just the amusingly malicious Hellhost that found a way to provoke Martin in a karmically appropriate manner.
[/QB]

So the situation is, Martin was goaded in hell for posting in a way that irritated/upset hosts on other boards just so an unfair punishment could be inflicted and then justified on the basis that hell isn't fair.

I think it would have been more transparent just to impose the penalty on Marin immediately on the board/s were he offended instead of this weird pretence of I'm not sure what-trying to look fair????
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
It was a C6 violation.

I thought Doublethink's original approach in Hell might give Martin pause for thought about his self-admittedly deliberately obscure posting style. Combo of a corrective and a rather good wheeze.

Me? I'd have laughed, posted "point taken, I'll try to be more careful", and moved on.

Martin chose to take it on, even after an Admin signal that it was getting serious. With inevitable consequences.

I hope and believe he'll be back before too long. Personally, and within reasonable limits, I think his somewhat strange ways of posting add to the general melee. But I don't have a problem with the signal that a bit of behaviour modification when posting wouldn't come amiss. In the end, RooK had to call foul and show the red card. That's what happens with C6 violations. It was a deliberate foul, folks. To my mind, there's no getting away from that.
 
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :
 
C6 is about respecting the Hosts and Admins. It takes some strange mental gymnastics to respect someone who is acting in an arbitrary and childish way. I'm afraid Doublethink lost my respect due to her recent behavior in Hell, and others repeating "C6" all over the place is not enough to change my mind.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
That's not a view I share, but in any case I don't think it matters. The Styx is the place to query Hosts' behaviour and rulings, not the thread on which the causes for concern happened. Anyone can protest in the Styx until a Styx Host calls time. The C6 call arose because of behaviour in Hell. Wrong board to protest.

Is that really all that difficult?
 
Posted by passer (# 13329) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The Styx is the place to query Hosts' behaviour and rulings, not the thread on which the causes for concern happened. Anyone can protest in the Styx until a Styx Host calls time. The C6 call arose because of behaviour in Hell. Wrong board to protest.

Is that really all that difficult?

It looks as though Hosts' behaviour and rulings is being queried, or am I missing something? When so much disgruntlement is generated amongst so many long-time members over the treatment of a member who many of them have themselves grumbled about over the years, you have to wonder if some reflection is in order.
 
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 66) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
She's just the amusingly malicious Hellhost that found a way to provoke Martin in a karmically appropriate manner.

Sounds like entrapment to me. And Martin's on my "scroll past" list so it's not like I'm a big fan.

(And "found a way" seems to suggest "looking for a way".)
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
Doublethink's treatment of Martin is only justifiable if it is, as Barnabas62 says, a wheeze. If it ends in a suspension then it isn't a wheeze. At some point a game has become personal and nasty, and it was DT's game, and she made sure Martin not only couldn't play it on equal terms - arguably funny - but also couldn't respond to it at all. He had no voice. He couldn't be himself. That's horrible if it goes on for more than a moment. When it becomes a suspension, and an indeterminate one at that ..
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
RooK, your original warning telling Martin to change his posting style got all the respect it deserved . . . none.

How should he have acknowledged such an absurd demand? If I were in his shoes, I would have told you to eff off . . . in a very round about way, off course.

If you want respect, be respectable.

Until you apologize, you have completely lost mine.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Doublethink's treatment of Martin is only justifiable if it is, as Barnabas62 says, a wheeze. If it ends in a suspension then it isn't a wheeze. At some point a game has become personal and nasty, and it was DT's game, and she made sure Martin not only couldn't play it on equal terms - arguably funny - but also couldn't respond to it at all. He had no voice. He couldn't be himself. That's horrible if it goes on for more than a moment. When it becomes a suspension, and an indeterminate one at that ..

Which is why I hope Martin's suspension, though valid for the C6 violation, is short and would urge some counsel for DT as this truly was jerkish vindictiveness - especially when completely clear posts were devoweled. Hosts are human, but standards should be upheld for them on the boards they host as well as for shipmates.
 
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Is that really all that difficult?

Actually yes, I think this all that difficult.

In ordinary purgatorial mode the line between hostly behaviour and posting as shipmate is clear, and it isn't all that difficult to work out when to go to the styx.

But with a host behaving in hellish manner and capriciously disemvowelling posts, I think the line between what needs to be respected as hostly ruling and what is part of the rough and tumble of hell is actually quite difficult.

What RooK posted in Dead Horses was crystal clear as an adminly instruction. That the context of that extended to hell when a host is messing around with your posts and running them through a reading score is actually not so straightforward.

I completely see the point that hosts wish to minimise the rings under their eyes, and my find Martin's posting style tiring. I think it is perfectly legitimate to say so, and give warnings in that regard.

But when what appears to be a playful mode in hell turns into completely serious banning mode, then I think it is all that difficult.
 
Posted by Starbug (# 15917) on :
 
As someone who is relatively new to the Ship, it seems to me that Martin's suspension has upset a number of long-term shipmates, who have far more previous knowledge of these boards than me. Personally, I think it's unfair to suspend anyone (not just Martin) for an unknown length of time - if I had to give one of my staff a written warning, I would have to let them know exactly how long that warning would remain on their file. It would be cruel to impose a warning and keep dangling it over their head for an indeterminate period.

As far as Martin's 'readability count' is concerned - if I don't understand something he says, I just skip over it. The disemvowelling was funny the first time, but after that it starts to appear vindinctive.
 
Posted by Pooks (# 11425) on :
 
I can't speak for DT, but when I saw what DT did to Martin's posts in Hell, I did wonder if it's a sign that she's pulling her hair out behind the scenes. I skip all Martin's posts because I am one of those slow and dumb readers that Comet mentioned, who couldn't be bothered to have to read a post two or three times just to understand what the poster is on about. I want to get on with reading the thread so I can move on to other threads. But skipping posts is not an option open to the hosts. Given the Hell thread in question was opened by Martin, it would probably mean it's going to have more than one of Martin's contributions in it that a host would have to read or decipher. Personally I can see why this could be alarming to anyone who finds Martin's style difficult or frustrating to read. Now some people when frustrated may choose to shout, others may not want to lose their rag so choose to use humour to defuse their own irritation while still making a point. Given DT is a Brit and she usually chooses to use knowledge and logic to deal with topics and situations, I suspect that she did what she did either because she's in a great mood (and decided to have some fun) or it's a sign that she was irritated, but was making a point in a clear but round about way. (Those were the only two logical explanations that I could come up with). All this is to say that while I think DT's action in Hell is understandable, the problem is that it could have at least two different interpretations. Martin may just have thought DT and others were having fun at his expense so played along?

Now the big bird, er, I mean Rook. Yes I do think he is a tyrant, but I think it's unfair to say his tyranny is only caused by the lack of chocorrit – that's what he would like you to believe. I think at least a part of it is caused by the birdy nature of an admin which is just like a mother hen protecting a chick in distress. He is going to protect his hosts every time.

Of course I could be wrong about everyone involved. So I'll shuddup and go back to picking my mangy fur.
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
... she made sure Martin not only couldn't play it on equal terms - arguably funny - but also couldn't respond to it at all. He had no voice. He couldn't be himself. That's horrible if it goes on for more than a moment. When it becomes a suspension, and an indeterminate one at that ..

I think you underestimate Martin. He could and did respond to it in a variety of ways. He was, in fact, suspended precisely for responding inappropriately on the thread in question. He could have got round the restrictions by responding in the appropriate place: the Styx.

Hell hosting often treads a thin line; shipmates know where to go to complain. Martin was/is not some terrified bunny cowering before the headlights of an oncoming truck - nor was he left without a voice. He chose not to make his protest in the place where it would have been heard, and (probably) effective.
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Starbug:
As someone who is relatively new to the Ship, it seems to me that Martin's suspension has upset a number of long-term shipmates, who have far more previous knowledge of these boards than me.

No, this is normal every time someone who has been around for some time is banned or suspended, however much people were irritated by the person before the suspension or banning. What happens is you get:
and so on ...

I'm not sure how much can actually be done to sort out any of that lot. Some assumptions have to be made, particularly that people voluntarily joining the Ship are adults and have bothered to read enough to know how the boards work (although the lack of knowledge never ceases to amaze me). And that as adults they can choose to make their own decisions.

* I do that for the day job, I quite like being unPC somewhere, and not have to spell everything out in words of one syllable.

edited to remove spare word

[ 30. September 2012, 13:38: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:

and so on ...


.. so there's never any need to take anyone who disagrees seriously.
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
quote:
hatless: Doublethink's treatment of Martin is only justifiable if it is, as Barnabas62 says, a wheeze. If it ends in a suspension then it isn't a wheeze. At some point a game has become personal and nasty, and it was DT's game, and she made sure Martin not only couldn't play it on equal terms - arguably funny - but also couldn't respond to it at all. He had no voice. He couldn't be himself. That's horrible if it goes on for more than a moment. When it becomes a suspension, and an indeterminate one at that ..
This.

The game wasn't funny anymore.
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
Although it appeared to have the elements of a game, it began as a very clear Hell host warning. I admit to having played up the game element myself and for that I'm sorry, as I now feel that I may have egged Martin on (though he's not a guy with a noticeable egg shortage). I like both DT and Martin, would happily meet them both in real life and stand them a drink (separately or together) in pretty much any hostelry they care to name where the beer is less than £5 a pint (that's not a limit on what kind of drink I would buy, just a limit on the type hostelry).

FKG 15.27 by the way
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:

and so on ...


.. so there's never any need to take anyone who disagrees seriously.
No, that there are a lot of competing interests and that not all if any of them can be satisfied.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Hom many posts by Martin are there in this thread?

How many posts are there by Martin in the Styx to query this final warning?

Do my old eyes deceive me, or is the answer zero in both cases?

As QLib says, he could have sounded off here to his heart's content. He'd already attracted some support. Personally I don't have a clue why he decided not to do that and we have a good general guideline to to criticise Shipmates who have been sent ashore.

But I do wonder what the Hell he was playing at.
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
Sorry for the double post, but I'd want to add that in a way to me, Hell can be the fairest board on the Ship. Yes, it can get nasty and capricious. But below this, it has an atmosphere of: you can call someone names, but expect other people to call you names back. You may say nasty things, but prepared to receive nasty things back. And I really respect the Hell hosts for being able to maintain and support this kind of fairness.

In Martin's case however, it was as if someone sat on him in the schoolyard so that he couldn't move and then suspended him for trying to defend himself. Yes, he could have run to the schoolmaster (the Styx), but I wouldn't have done that either. I'd have put up a fight, just like Martin did, all within the spirit in which Doublethink started it.

His problem is: the one putting him to the ground was a Hellhost, and when Martin fought back, the Admins decided to use their power.
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
Poor analogy. The Hosts are the schoolmasters, but if you think they've treated you badly in the playground, you have the right to go for a public hearing before the governing body.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
Although it appeared to have the elements of a game, it began as a very clear Hell host warning. I admit to having played up the game element myself and for that I'm sorry, as I now feel that I may have egged Martin on (though he's not a guy with a noticeable egg shortage). I like both DT and Martin, would happily meet them both in real life and stand them a drink (separately or together) in pretty much any hostelry they care to name where the beer is less than £5 a pint (that's not a limit on what kind of drink I would buy, just a limit on the type hostelry).

FKG 15.27 by the way

The hostly warning was to post in clear English that anyone would understand and even when Martin did that his posts were disemvoweled. That is what I fault DT for. It ceased to be either discipline or a game and gave the appearance of a personal vendetta. I usually have the highest respect for DT. Martin should have known his very last post, would result in a suspension. That is his fault. He should have been complaining here - loudly. I wish I knew why he didn't.

Just a side comment: while bannings or suspensions of controversial people generate large Styx threads, I've not seen one where so many people who didn't like the individual involved have objected to their treatment. I've only been here a couple of years, so perhaps I've missed some blowouts in the past where this occurred.

I'm game for the beer with everyone...
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
quote:
QLib: Poor analogy. The Hosts are the schoolmasters, but if you think they've treated you badly in the playground, you have the right to go for a public hearing before the governing body.
Whatever. The important thing for me is what this means to Hell.

I've called people to Hell a couple of times, and I've been called nasty things, including by Hell hosts. But the fairness of Hell is that when someone says something nasty to me, I can always say something back. And I can trust the Hell hosts to make sure that I have that possibility.

It's this trust that has been violated. It was a Hellhost that said (or in this case: did) something nasty to Martin, and it was the same Hellhost that made sure that he couldn't say anything back. And when he tried, he was suspended.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Sorry, my post should have said " ....not to criticise ...".
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl:
The hostly warning was to post in clear English that anyone would understand and even when Martin did that his posts were disemvoweled. ...
I'm game for the beer with everyone...

Yes to the beer, but as regards your post, DT was much more specific. She said
quote:
I am making a special rule just for you Martin - any more posts on this thread by you must have a Flesch–Kincaid Readability Level of a maximum of grade 5. If you post something that doesn't, I will disemvowel it.
(My bold)
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl:
The hostly warning was to post in clear English that anyone would understand and even when Martin did that his posts were disemvoweled. ...
I'm game for the beer with everyone...

Yes to the beer, but as regards your post, DT was much more specific. She said
quote:
I am making a special rule just for you Martin - any more posts on this thread by you must have a Flesch–Kincaid Readability Level of a maximum of grade 5. If you post something that doesn't, I will disemvowel it.
(My bold)

There were a couple of very good posts that were a shade shy of the desired score. It would have been good to let those go. They were clear, which is what hosts and Admins stated they want. Martin also pretty much showed the scoring method was worthless, of course that got him banned. It could have and should have been handled differently by all involved except maybe Rook. Poor guy gets left with the dirty work.
 
Posted by Organ Builder (# 12478) on :
 
There are a few things that continue to bother me.

Martin went to Hell because Louise directed him there--he was making remarks about other posters that are only allowed in Hell. We've always been led to believe that that safety valve function is the only--or at least, the most--legitimate function of Hell. The addition of an extra rule aimed only at Martin undermined that function, whether intentionally or not.

As for taking complaints to Styx, I can think of very few times during my passage on the Ship where that made any difference at all. Reversals of rulings and apologies are not non-existent, but they are so rare as to be statistically insignificant. So I can understand why Martin might have considered posting here a waste of time--which means, perhaps, that the usefulness of Styx has been undermined as well.

What I have noticed is that Styx threads influence future behavior--hosts won't step in the same cowpie twice.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
RooK, your original warning telling Martin to change his posting style got all the respect it deserved . . . none.
...
Until you apologize, you have completely lost mine.

I guess I'll have to learn to carry on anyway.

You may find your philosophical stance to have some pragmatic complications.
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
The addition of an extra rule aimed only at Martin

This.

And that's where, IMO, things went south fast.

There are posters here posting in what seems to be their first language whose usage of English, &/or spelling, &/or punctuation, get up my nose. I regard this as my own personal problem. Am I right about this, or am I wrong?

Often I have to read sentences of theirs twice to make head or tail of what I'm reading. I think I've only ever seen other Shipmates, not Hosts, address issues like these. It's one of the things I appreciate about the Ship; there's no "My Fair Lady" crap about how people use the language.

Until now.

Granted, I'm not a Host required to read every tedious (or brilliant) word that's posted. Granted, many posters here have been called to Hell over posting styles.

But Martin was not called to Hell -- in this instance, anyway -- over his posting style.

DT or RooK or anyone else irritated over Martin's posting style could have at him, then, instead of setting him up for ambush. Why make a special rule for one, and only one, Shipmate? ISTM there can be only one explanation for this, and it's one that doesn't reflect well on the Ship.
 
Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :
 
I fail to see how the suspension had anything to do with Doublethink's rule. In the post announcing the suspension, Rook refers only to the content of what Martin posted as a C6 ("Respect the Ship's crew") violation, not to the style of the post, and not even to the fact that the content was encoded in Morse code. And this was after this warning from Rook about a possible C6 violation. Martin was both complaining about hosting outside of The Styx and admitting to circumventing that hosting. How does that not warrant Rook's decision to suspend him?
 
Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
RooK, your original warning telling Martin to change his posting style got all the respect it deserved . . . none. ... Until you apologize, you have completely lost mine.

I guess I'll have to learn to carry on anyway. You may find your philosophical stance to have some pragmatic complications.
It is easy to deal with people pragmatically when one has lost all respect for them. Which is why many of us care about respect, whether from friend or foe.

Well, Martin doesn't fit in a box, that's for sure... Not even in the one for conforming non-conformists, it appears.
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
Well, your mileage varies.

In my view, Martin was singled out, first, for his admittedly hard-to-follow posting style.

Then a rule not applied to other other Shipmates posting on that thread was applied to him alone.

Then his ability to express himself was effectively eradicated through disemvowelling.

Met with this singularly-applied treatment, he perhaps lost his equilibrium, leading to the C6 violation. I don't know Martin, and grasp perhaps half, or less, of what he writes; but I get the impression that language, especially in the unusual ways he employs it, is of enormous importance to Martin. I could be wrong; it's just an impression. Perhaps he's been having us all on. What do I know? I'm Mercan, and do not speak the Queen's English.

Of course it's possible to limit one's view to the immediate violation and ignore what led up to it. But then we're back at the "bullying" discussion further upthread. And from where I sit (having no part in the Hell thread Martin began), it looks like a set-up. Or, as Sine pointed out above, entrapment.

X-posted; meant to respond to Hyatt above.

[ 30. September 2012, 20:04: Message edited by: Porridge ]
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
I have mixed feelings about this. I don't think that, given my understanding of hell, the FKG rule with disemvollewing was an unreasonable thing to do. I am however, willing to accept that is the collective view and would not do something similar again.

(Obviously, if I had thought it was clearly borderline I would have discussed the matter with the admins in detail first.)

On reflection, I do regret the consonant removal, as I did not really appreciate the overall effect until after reposting.

I did not anticipate that the thread would end with Martin being suspended - I think that is an unfortunate conjunction of circumstances with what was going on in Dead Horses. It was not my call, and I am not going to comment further on it.

[For the record; three of Martin's posts on one thread on the Hell board were edited, two were disemvollewed and one had the consonants removed.]

[ 30. September 2012, 20:36: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
Thank you for your response, DT. It helps to step back and recognize that the ultimate suspension was an accidental conflation of circumstances on two different threads. For me, it also helps to know that you're re-thinking the strategy employed in Martin's hell thread.

I find Martin's style opaque. At the same time, there is something I find aesthetically intriguing about that opacity. (But then, I also read poetry, something not many Mercans do.)

These little black marks on white screen-space comprise our only access to meaningful participation here. Rendering someone's posts unreadable seems to me the equivalent of suspension -- in fact, worse (though I'm unable to articulate quite why, at the moment).

That action also prevents others from evaluating the affected individual's responses. It seems like shunning to me.

I do feel for hosts trying to work out what the hell Martin is on about. Unlike the rest of us, you lack the option of scrolling on by. And yes, I too wish Martin would try a little harder for clarity.

I hope that Martin will soon be allowed to return. That said, if it had been my posts which were rendered unreadable, I'm not sure I'd accept any such invitation.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

Well, Martin doesn't fit in a box, that's for sure... Not even in the one for conforming non-conformists, it appears.

He's a nonconforming nonconformist, which doesn't make him a conformist.

I suppose it takes one to know one.

Some lessons maybe for all of us in this - including Martin. I had a draft post pointing out the accidental combo of DH and Hell H & A actions, but sat on it, thinking I'd maybe posted too much already. Anyway, Doublethink put it much better.

There was no bad-faith entrapment or ambushing going on here. Conforming (that dirty word again) to the general rule that accidental combinations of circumstances (cockups if you like) explain more of life than conspiracy theories ever do.

I still think it was a pretty good wheeze, with a good and necessary corrective intent. Seemed well in line with the Hostly insouciance, for example, of Sarkycow and RooK himself when they were HellHosts. Neither of them took any prisoners when it came to imaginative and original corrective action.
 
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 66) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There was no bad-faith entrapment or ambushing going on here.

Then RooK's "found a way to provoke Martin" comment was particularly unfortunate or inept.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
I think the word you're struggling for is "evil".
 
Posted by Organ Builder (# 12478) on :
 
I don't think anyone can quite picture Sine struggling for a word.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
So we have a C6 violation; disrespect to the crew. But Doublethink has no issue. Go figure.
 
Posted by art dunce (# 9258) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
I think the word you're struggling for is "evil".

You flatter yourself.
 
Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :
 
I am unhappy about wading in here. I like both Rook and Martin. In a perfect world Martin would be posting and Rook would not be the object of angry posting.

Did Martin break a rule? The translation is correct. See for yourselves. He did. I thought it was funny. I am not in a position of enforcing the rules. Rook is. Rules should apply across the board, with no exceptions for old hands, or favorites. Martin broke a rule that is a bedrock of making the Ship sail smoothly. Something had to happen.

In a living demonstration of how even good people make mistakes, I was a host on the Ship once. I made mistakes. And when I did, I was given some guidance where guidance was needed and I got my ass chewed where my ass needed to be chewed. When either happened, it was not done in public. Hosts on the Ship need to have an aura of being respected. That aura of respect prevents all kinds of potential problems from ever arising. Having a public ass chewing is not terribly conducive to maintaining that aura of respect.

Additionally, hosting is a volunteer job. They don't get paid. They get perks and respect. Public slagging is not, let me assure you, a perk.

Is it wrong to question what DT did? No. Was it within the tradition of Hell hosting? Yes. Did Martin himself question it? No. Will DT have some discussion about what she did in the appropriate forum? Not my problem.

The suspension will be over soon enough. Life will go on. The Sun will seem to rise in the morning and seem to set in the evening.

What is said in the Styx is taken seriously. Our Hosts and Administrators are here because we are all friends. They wish to remain our friends and therefore take criticism seriously. Some of you know that first hand.

I am not asking anyone to stop posting, or questioning. I am just saying that the end is not nigh and all may not be as it seems.
 
Posted by Trin (# 12100) on :
 
Doublethink: You're annoying and unreadable so I'm going to disemvowel you! Ha ha!

Martin: Ha ha! This was Fun! PS. I found a way to circumvent your game!

Rook: That count's as a C6 violation and I'm looking for an excuse. Bye!

Community: Wtf?

Rook: Whatever, losers.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tortuf:

Did Martin break a rule? The translation is correct. See for yourselves. He did. I thought it was funny. I am not in a position of enforcing the rules. Rook is. Rules should apply across the board, with no exceptions for old hands, or favorites. Martin broke a rule that is a bedrock of making the Ship sail smoothly. Something had to happen.

This is what I used to decode Martin's post. I agree with RooK - what Martin said was a C6. If he'd had some morsy banter with Doublethink he'd not have been suspended imo.

Such is life on board.
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
DT, thanks for the post with additional thoughts, something you didn't have to do.
 
Posted by passer (# 13329) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
This is what I used to decode Martin's post. I agree with RooK - what Martin said was a C6. If he'd had some morsy banter with Doublethink he'd not have been suspended imo.

Such is life on board.

Your agreeing with RooK is commendable. Your analytical opinion is valuable. Your platitude is apposite.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Trin:
Doublethink: You're annoying and unreadable so I'm going to disemvowel you! Ha ha!

Martin: Ha ha! This was Fun! PS. I found a way to circumvent your game!

Rook: That count's as a C6 violation and I'm looking for an excuse. Bye!

Community: Wtf?

Rook: Whatever, losers.

Pretty much how I see it.


Martin was the first person I argued with on SoF - in March 2005. Someone sent me a welcome PM with words to the effect "I see you're arguing with our Mr Incomprehensible". Which suggests to me that he had that established reputation seven and a half years ago. Why his posting style has suddenly become a conduct issue is utterly beyond me. He's been posting like that for years. Some people get it, some don't. If it's a deliberate affectation, then it carries its own punishment - Martin is read by fewer people, and less attentively by others, than he might have been.

Doublethink's malicious humour is one thing. That's the way Hell can work sometimes. It was a bit mean, a bit petty, and a bit funny, but within the established parameters in which Hell hosts are allowed to abuse their powers. RooK's use of it as a ground for suspending a member of this community spoils the joke. It now just looks like spitefulness. Please re-think the policy here.
 
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :
 
Some here seem to think that the "community" view is the same as the "admin" view. It isn't.

Martin is an old hand, he broke the rules, he knows well enough how to obey the rules as he is an old hand. Therefore he was suspended pdq. The more prodigous your posting and the longer you post the more quickly the rules are enforced. A relative newbie would get a warning before suspension. That is how the admin works here. This is true for all old hands and has nothing to do with the overall opinion of the community on these boards. Just ask Ken if you do not believe me!

Jengie
 
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
It was not what Erin would have done. She might have reamed Martin a new asshole, she might have suspended him, but she wouldn't have goaded him and toyed with him in that way.

I don't think it's productive for anyone to try to determine the rights and wrongs of an action by posing the question "WWED?" and I don't think this is correct in any case. I can't be the only one who remembers The Atheist being goaded and toyed with in a very similar way.

Just as I had no time for The Atheist back in the day, I rarely bother to read Martin's contributions, because his tediously affected stream-of-consciousness schtick just isn't worth it. And to be honest, I can't honestly say his presence or absence on the boards would greatly bother me either way. I can't even say I was surprised to learn of his suspension after RooK's warning in DH. That doesn't make it right, though.

I find it very ironic that the discussion of an allegedly incomprehensible poster's suspension hinges on unclear communication. If the disemvowelling was playful, Martin's retorts in kind were entirely reasonable. If it was a hostly final warning, he was clearly asking for trouble. The fact that a casual observer would be unable to tell which it was suggests to me that this is an overreaction.

Usual caveats apply, not least (to paraphrase Wallace Sayre) that the disagreement here is so strong because the stakes are so small.

[Flesch Kincade Grade Level 9.40, if it matters]
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by Trin:
Doublethink: You're annoying and unreadable so I'm going to disemvowel you! Ha ha!

Martin: Ha ha! This was Fun! PS. I found a way to circumvent your game!

Rook: That count's as a C6 violation and I'm looking for an excuse. Bye!

Community: Wtf?

Rook: Whatever, losers.

Pretty much how I see it.


Martin was the first person I argued with on SoF - in March 2005. Someone sent me a welcome PM with words to the effect "I see you're arguing with our Mr Incomprehensible". Which suggests to me that he had that established reputation seven and a half years ago. Why his posting style has suddenly become a conduct issue is utterly beyond me. He's been posting like that for years. Some people get it, some don't. If it's a deliberate affectation, then it carries its own punishment - Martin is read by fewer people, and less attentively by others, than he might have been.

Doublethink's malicious humour is one thing. That's the way Hell can work sometimes. It was a bit mean, a bit petty, and a bit funny, but within the established parameters in which Hell hosts are allowed to abuse their powers. RooK's use of it as a ground for suspending a member of this community spoils the joke. It now just looks like spitefulness. Please re-think the policy here.

Martin can write in ways that would earn him a Crystal Mark for clear and concise communication when he chooses do to so. You have to be good with words and at expressing ideas to muck about with them in the way that he does.

If you believe that Martin’s unique style of posting is an act that he puts on and takes off as he desires. And that it’s an act that he uses to avoid being called on certain opinions and get away with personal attacks, then maybe as he sowed so did he reap.

Martin’s been warned – and suspended – for walking this particular line before.

We don’t allow foreign language posting, text speak and ASCII on the boards – so why should we tolerate Morse code? Particularly when it’s posted in response to a warning about posting in tongues? Martin’s been here long enough to know the likely outcome of doing that.

OTH, if your perspective on Martin is different, then you may not agree with the above assessment.

Tubbs
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
We don’t allow foreign language posting, text speak and ASCII on the boards – so why should we tolerate Morse code? Particularly when it’s posted in response to a warning about posting in tongues? Martin’s been here long enough to know the likely outcome of doing that.

Tubbs

I suppose one exception has been allowed, namely Kenwritez' brilliant post in interpretive dance notation. There were however three important differences:

i) He announced it as such
ii) It was entirely original
iii) He never repeated it.
 
Posted by Moo (# 107) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I suppose one exception has been allowed, namely Kenwritez' brilliant post in interpretive dance notation. There were however three important differences:

i) He announced it as such
ii) It was entirely original
iii) He never repeated it.

iv) It was in The Circus.

Moo
 
Posted by Organ Builder (# 12478) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tortuf:
In a living demonstration of how even good people make mistakes, I was a host on the Ship once. I made mistakes. And when I did, I was given some guidance where guidance was needed and I got my ass chewed where my ass needed to be chewed. When either happened, it was not done in public. Hosts on the Ship need to have an aura of being respected. That aura of respect prevents all kinds of potential problems from ever arising. Having a public ass chewing is not terribly conducive to maintaining that aura of respect.

Do you honestly think there would be less respect from this community for the Hosts and Administrators if they occasionally
admitted something had been a mistake and worked to publicly rectify it, or ameliorate its consequences?

Unless I've missed it, Martin's suspension is still open-ended. We have no idea if this is a two-week or a six-month suspension. I hope at the very least that Martin knows the duration; otherwise, it's very hard not to see this as personal pique.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
FTR, I like Martin and mostly enjoy his posting style.
But here it is, simplified.

Martin - Behaviour

Rook - Warning

Martin - Behaviour repeated, amplified

Rook - Suspension


As to DTs behaviour; fair or unfair, Martin could have brought it here, he chose to play instead.

Not sure what the problem is.
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
To me it looks more like:


Martin - Behaviour

Rook - Warning

Hell host - Playing a game with Martin about his behaviour

Martin - Participating in this game

Rook - Suspension
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
FTR, I like Martin and mostly enjoy his posting style.
But here it is, simplified.

Martin - Behaviour

Rook - Warning

Martin - Behaviour repeated, amplified

Rook - Suspension


As to DTs behaviour; fair or unfair, Martin could have brought it here, he chose to play instead.

Not sure what the problem is.

The problem as I see it is that the behavior that RooK warned him to stop was his posting style. It was an absurd and outrageous directive.

I see RooK's warning and enforcement of it as more the problem than anything DT did.

I am also alarmed that some here are fine with Martin's distinctive style being banned. Yes, a homogenized ship is just what we need. Non-conformists begone!

BTW, Trin, that was a very succinct and on-target summary above. Are you the mirror image twin of Martin? [Biased]
 
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :
 
Tubbs:
quote:
Martin’s been warned – and suspended – for walking this particular line before.
I didn't know this, and it does change the picture. However, I've never felt that Martin's posting style was something completely under his control. In the past he's talked about his battles with depression, and other issues. I always assumed that how he writes is a reflection of how he (or his meds) are seeing the world on any particular day. Sometimes he's easier to understand than others - there are plenty of conditions that do that to you.

[ 01. October 2012, 13:58: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
 
Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :
 
Oh, ferfucksake. [Disappointed]

What is this place actually for? It’s a discussion board. It’s for us, for our discussion. The Hosts are here to moderate our activity in order to facilitate discussion. We are not here for their amusement or to serve their privilege in Hosting. RooK’s suspension of Martin abjectly fails to serve the purpose of the place.

I think RooK’s self-declared ‘evil’ use of banning power is fucking pathetic. I hope he isn’t such a tosser behind the scenes, and that all this ‘misanthropic tyranny’ shtick is just a puerile affectation for our benefit. IF he really thinks all Shipmates are stupid morons, he should resign his position as Admin and let someone less ‘evil’ serve, IMO.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
The problem as I see it is that the behavior that RooK warned him to stop was his posting style. It was an absurd and outrageous directive.

I see RooK's warning and enforcement of it as more the problem than anything DT did.

I am also alarmed that some here are fine with Martin's distinctive style being banned. Yes, a homogenized ship is just what we need. Non-conformists begone!

I think you are being disingenuous about the reason Martin was let ashore. The offense which resulted in his shore leave was to post a clear C6 violation (an intentional slap in the face) that was not in plain English (a long-standing and always-enforced ship rule). That was not part of a "style" of posting; it was an intentional flouting of authority.
 
Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
Do you honestly think there would be less respect from this community for the Hosts and Administrators if they occasionally
admitted something had been a mistake and worked to publicly rectify it, or ameliorate its consequences?

No.

A public admission of making a mistake is a good thing. A public reaming may not be a good thing.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Oh, ferfucksake. [Disappointed]

What is this place actually for? It’s a discussion board. It’s for us, for our discussion. The Hosts are here to moderate our activity in order to facilitate discussion. We are not here for their amusement or to serve their privilege in Hosting. RooK’s suspension of Martin abjectly fails to serve the purpose of the place.

Oh come on now. The intro to Hell is pretty clear: "Drawing a big target on your chest" and other such warnings. Many noobs have been toyed with, in Hell and elsewhere and I don't recall any of them being defended as Martin PC Not has been. OK, Martin PC has made positive contributions, but the Ship's Commandments apply to all of us.

quote:

I think RooK’s self-declared ‘evil’ use of banning power is fucking pathetic. I hope he isn’t such a tosser behind the scenes, and that all this ‘misanthropic tyranny’ shtick is just a puerile affectation for our benefit. IF he really thinks all Shipmates are stupid morons, he should resign his position as Admin and let someone less ‘evil’ serve, IMO.

Is that a deliberate attempt to get Shore leave?
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
Mousethief, again, directly from RooK's warning:

"So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

Yes, the suspension IS about Martin's posting style. (Is that plain enough English for you?)
 
Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
[QUOTE]Is that a deliberate attempt to get Shore leave?

No. Is that a deliberate attempt to incite such?
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
SPtP,

I doubt the ship is in imminent danger of conformity. If Martin had merely continued his posting in his typical vain, there might have been a point. Instead, he posted in Morse code. IMO, a demonstration of control, if not restraint. And a deliberate thumbing of his nose.

Yorick,

Rook* chooses to spend time helping run a board where people work out their issues with the world and seek refuge from same. Perhaps his style can be abrasive and harsh, I do not think evil is anywhere near the mark.

* as do all the hosts and admins.
 
Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :
 
'Evil' was his word. But I agree, he patently isn't (I like the chap, and much admire his scintillating intelligence, FWIW), but all this bullshit evil tyrant shtick? Bollocks, that's what that is.
 
Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :
 
He calls himself evil to hide the fact that deep down inside he is a nice guy. Just don't tell anyone.
 
Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :
 
Yup. It's so frigging obvious it makes my anus contract and my toes curl every time he plays the big bad evil Admin.
 
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Perhaps his style can be abrasive and harsh, I do not think evil is anywhere near the mark.

Only because he isn't really trying.
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Oh, ferfucksake. [Disappointed]

What is this place actually for? It’s a discussion board. It’s for us, for our discussion. The Hosts are here to moderate our activity in order to facilitate discussion. We are not here for their amusement or to serve their privilege in Hosting. RooK’s suspension of Martin abjectly fails to serve the purpose of the place.

I think RooK’s self-declared ‘evil’ use of banning power is fucking pathetic. I hope he isn’t such a tosser behind the scenes, and that all this ‘misanthropic tyranny’ shtick is just a puerile affectation for our benefit. IF he really thinks all Shipmates are stupid morons, he should resign his position as Admin and let someone less ‘evil’ serve, IMO.

Styx Host Tiara On

You seem to have got the Styx confused with Hell. If you want to call RooK out, then call him out in Hell. Don't call him out here.

Styx Host Tiara Off

Tubbs
Styx Host

[ 01. October 2012, 15:45: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Mousethief, again, directly from RooK's warning:

"So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

Yes, the suspension IS about Martin's posting style. (Is that plain enough English for you?)

Martin has not been banned – he’s just been suspended for two weeks. And the only change that he’s ever been asked to make to his “distinctive posting style” is to modify it slightly so what he is saying can be understood more easily. He has been asked this for the simplest and dullest of reasons – if others can understand what is being said, they can engage and debate with it properly. This being a discussion and debating space and all …

Tubbs

[ 01. October 2012, 15:49: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
 
Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
You seem to have got the Styx confused with Hell. If you want to call RooK out, then call him out in Hell. Don't call him out here.

Yes, I did get a little lost there. Thanks for the warning, and please accept my apologies.
 
Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Mousethief, again, directly from RooK's warning:

"So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

Yes, the suspension IS about Martin's posting style. (Is that plain enough English for you?)

Martin has not been banned – he’s just been suspended for two weeks. And the only change that he’s ever been asked to make to his “distinctive posting style” is to modify it slightly so what he is saying can be understood more easily. He has been asked this for the simplest and dullest of reasons – if others can understand what is being said, they can engage and debate with it properly. This being a discussion and debating space and all …

Tubbs

Thanks for the clarification and for confirming that this really is about Martin's posting style. I've already posted my thoughts on that.

I was aware that it was a suspension. Thanks for clearly setting forth the length of it.
 
Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tortuf:
He calls himself evil to hide the fact that deep down inside he is a nice guy. Just don't tell anyone.

It would be so good though, especially when there's a difficulty like this one, if hosts and admins could deal with the rest of us with - well, I was going to say politeness and respect, but even just to communicate to us normally, without scorn and threat would be good. You really don't have to belittle or terrify people to explain yourself effectively.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Mousethief, again, directly from RooK's warning:

"So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

Yes, the suspension IS about Martin's posting style. (Is that plain enough English for you?)

No. "Meth-like impulses" needn't be coterminous with "'shroom-like muses" and the fact that he listed them both rather suggests it isn't. I'd say it's plain enough English for me and you both (do you, like Yorick, think this is Hell? or do you just fancy getting called there?) that "meth-like impulses" easily includes posting in Morse code. Tubbs' re-interpretation notwithstanding.

[ 01. October 2012, 16:24: Message edited by: mousethief ]
 
Posted by Loquacious beachcomber (# 8783) on :
 
[alert - parable based on hyperbole - alert]
I appreciate the definitions of bullying, entrapment and victimization here; they have helped me to recognize that recently, I was bullyed by the sales manager of a car dealership in his role as an administrator.
The whole situation took place after entrapment by the car manufacturer and dealership; the manufacturer ran advertisements of a beautiful car on tv and in magazines; then the dealership placed the exact model in the exact colour I wanted on display right beside the highway. This was particularly an example of entrapment since that highway leads directly to the local Tim Horton's coffee shop, so they knew all of the locals would have to pass that geographical point.
When I looked at the car, it had a MSRP of a shade over $45,000. I sought out a salesman to act as host, and offered him a cheque for $38,000 as an "all-in price" to include taxes, delivery, dealer preparation, and licence transfer. I explained my special circumstances; to free more cash than that from my investments would cause me to incur a penalty, and I had no wish to finance any amount. He told me the sales manager would follow dealer policy and not accept such an offer, but when I pressed him he took it to the sales manager/admin.
The admin informed me that he would require an additional $4000, and that I should not hound his salesman/host further to accept the offer. There was a clear power imbalance there; without the sales manger/admin's signature, I could not purchase the car I wanted; he refused to take my special circumstances into consideration, and instead made his decision based on the best interest of the private business concern which gave him his admin position.
Quite clearly, I was bullyed; to whom should I complain?
[end of parable based on hyperbole]
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
Frankly, I don't see LB's parable above shedding much light.

FWIW, I suspect Martin of being a mystic. It's that streak in him to which I'd be willing to ascribe his posting style. Personally, I'm not a Christian, but I may incline occasionally toward mysticism myself; that's what attracts me to his posting style and makes me bother to try (with only intermittent success, sadly) de-coding it.

What if someone were to try exploring the possible intersects of language and mysticism in a thread? I'm not proposing we do so, but if mysticism and language are up for discussion on this discussion board, it could develop into a very difficult-to-follow, but potentially- interesting-to-participants, thread.

Would all participants be suspended for any such attempt if one materialized? I only ask because, after all, many posters here probably have at least a nodding acquaintance with Christian mysticism, and that's a topic which often deals with the inexpressible.

But here, as the poet wrote,"I have to use words when I talk to you." And plain ordinary language is frankly not up to every communicative task which humans might attempt. Language is a blunt instrument (see Croeses's thread on theological gibberish) and experimenting with it in efforts to achieve more noetic results -- especially for believers -- must surely be par for the course.

And yes, I'm sure it would also make the hosts' eyes bleed.
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Mousethief, again, directly from RooK's warning:

"So here's the deal: dial back both the 'shroom-like muses and the meth-like impulses voluntarily, immediately, or I shall give the Crew a temporary break from you forcibly."

Yes, the suspension IS about Martin's posting style. (Is that plain enough English for you?)

Martin has not been banned – he’s just been suspended for two weeks. And the only change that he’s ever been asked to make to his “distinctive posting style” is to modify it slightly so what he is saying can be understood more easily. He has been asked this for the simplest and dullest of reasons – if others can understand what is being said, they can engage and debate with it properly. This being a discussion and debating space and all …

Tubbs

Thanks for the clarification and for confirming that this really is about Martin's posting style. I've already posted my thoughts on that.

I was aware that it was a suspension. Thanks for clearly setting forth the length of it.

I'm not sure I did confirm that, I just responded to your point about Martin's distinctive posting style being banned.

Tubbs
 
Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
I suspect Martin of being a mystic. It's that streak in him to which I'd be willing to ascribe his posting style. ...
What if someone were to try exploring the possible intersects of language and mysticism in a thread? I'm not proposing we do so, but if mysticism and language are up for discussion on this discussion board, it could develop into a very difficult-to-follow, but potentially- interesting-to-participants, thread.

Would all participants be suspended for any such attempt if one materialized? I only ask because, after all, many posters here probably have at least a nodding acquaintance with Christian mysticism, and that's a topic which often deals with the inexpressible.

But here, as the poet wrote,"I have to use words when I talk to you." And plain ordinary language is frankly not up to every communicative task which humans might attempt. Language is a blunt instrument (see Croeses's thread on theological gibberish) and experimenting with it in efforts to achieve more noetic results -- especially for believers -- must surely be par for the course.

And yes, I'm sure it would also make the hosts' eyes bleed.

I can't imagine why a thread on language and mysticism should make anyone's eyes bleed. (T.S.Eliot, anybody?) We had a zen thread once, if memory serves me correctly - does anyone else remember? Didn't it develop in Hell?

As for whether Martin is a mystic.... well, I look forward to your asking him that on his return.

[ 01. October 2012, 20:03: Message edited by: QLib ]
 
Posted by Moo (# 107) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
If Martin had merely continued his posting in his typical vain, ...

Great typo!

Moo
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
'Evil' was his word.

I thought Sine was sort of alluding to the "banality of evil", which is a line of argument I find myself somewhat persuaded by in this circumstance.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Suggestion:

H/As just *skim* Martin's posts, looking for really obvious violations (like "I think you're an idiot" in a Purg post). Otherwise, if a Shipmate feels attacked, they'll point it out, as they usually do.

That will save the H/As' bleeding eyes; allow Martin to continue his personal posting style; and let those of us who look forward to his posts enjoy them.

People who don't like his posting style can simply scroll on by, as we're often advised to do when we dislike a post or a poster.

Win, all around.
 
Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
Now there's a thought.

Should the Hosts & Admins take up Golden Key's idea, I'll be sure to muscle my way to the front of the queue to ask to be placed on the Ecclesiantics Hosts' Skim-only-for-really-obvious-violations list.

Mamacita? Can you reserve me a spot, please?
 
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
I had a DOES NOT COMPUTE reaction to suggestion of being able to skim Martin's posts for obvious violations.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Now there's a thought.

Should the Hosts & Admins take up Golden Key's idea, I'll be sure to muscle my way to the front of the queue to ask to be placed on the Ecclesiantics Hosts' Skim-only-for-really-obvious-violations list.

Mamacita? Can you reserve me a spot, please?

If someone asked to be on such a list, I'd give him/her extra scrutiny.
 
Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
Exactly.
 
Posted by The Bede's American Successor (# 5042) on :
 
He's back!

I don't hate all of you here. Consider how many of you I've friended on a certain commercially-available Internet posting service. However, have any of you considered what it is like to be gone for a while, come back and read the Styx like a good shipmate, and find yet another thread about Martin PC Not and his posting style?

For fuck's sake people, stuff like this is like coming back to visit a disfunctional family. You really do love the family members (see previous comment about friending people), but would like to think I gave up these drugs a long time ago.

There seems to be no recognition that life is full of gray areas, decisions have to be made, and everyone keeping this Ship afloat (shipmates and officers) is doing their best.

This discussion is a world-wide equivalent of what I have seen in many family-sized parishes. The arguments are a sign that everyone loves everyone else (or no one would come back for more), and fullfil something needed in their lives. However, it is not unrest leading to something new and worthwhile.

Erin (memory eternal) is dead. The Ship isn't going to go new places if you keep travelling the waters she skillfully charted. "Those days are passed now/and in the past they must remain...."
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
What a fascinating thread. We've got people who seem to think that Hosts can't warn people to modify their posts, even though posting is the only thing we all do here and therefore the only thing capable of being modified.
We also seem to think that Doublethink was merely engaged in some witty game with a nod and a wink, rather than having clearly stated a requirement with Host hat on.
 
Posted by The Bede's American Successor (# 5042) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
[alert - parable based on hyperbole - alert]
Quite clearly, I was bullyed; to whom should I complain?
[end of parable based on hyperbole]

You were only bullied if you had to finance CDN$4000 to leave the dealership alive. There is a choice not to play their game, at the risk of not getting the car.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
'allo playmates.

My unreserved apologies to DoubleThink, Rook and the Ship.

And my thanks.

Amongst the answers to my enigmatic mediocrity - surely he can't be THAT thick ? - to the lack of substance, the mediocrity behind my enigmatism, obfuscation, is the fact that I AM that thick and I've got in to some VERY bad habits as this paragraph demonstrates.

I have been badly playing a left-field game here for what, fourteen years.

Game over. I want those who pass me by to stop by too.

And I really would like to change my name to something less ... less. Martin etc or The Inertia of the Earwig or ...

Old habits will die REAL hard I know.

Thank you EVERYONE.
You know who you are.
Friends, critics and hosts.
In One.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
Welcome back [Smile]
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Thanks Double[T]think [Smile] indeed. I felt like a lost soul and used the time for reflection.
 
Posted by Japes (# 5358) on :
 
Welcome back! [Smile]
 
Posted by Niteowl (# 15841) on :
 
Good to see you back, Martin!
 
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on :
 
Welcome back Martin, and don't abandon the left field.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
Martin, your pm box is full - thanks for your attempt with the nested quotes. Have a look at how I have edited your OP - if you want you may repost your nested version as a new OP and I will lock the original thread. Otherwise, you can keep using the original thread with the edited OP.

You may wish to pm Jamat if you want them to join you on the thread - but that would mean you need to clear out your inbox a bit first.
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
A belated welcome back, Martin Etc. (or whoever you become next name change). I hope to understand more of your posts.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Thank you Doublethink.
And Nightowl
and Porridge
and balaam - LOVE that sig line
and Japes
and
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
wb Martin PC.

On! On! with the creativity, enigmatism (enigmaticism?) and occupation of left-field, but give me a chance with the style, please!

Sioni
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Sir.

Being a minimalist (HA!) I prefer enigmatism. I mean, if one goes to enigmaticism where will it all end? Enigmaticisticismisticalism?
 
Posted by Loquacious beachcomber (# 8783) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Bede's American Successor:
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
[alert - parable based on hyperbole - alert]
Quite clearly, I was bullyed; to whom should I complain?
[end of parable based on hyperbole]

You were only bullied if you had to finance CDN$4000 to leave the dealership alive. There is a choice not to play their game, at the risk of not getting the car.
So, is it, in fact, only bullying if there is no escape?
Sounds like a Purg thread here!
 
Posted by duchess (# 2764) on :
 
Comet's post here made me tear up. Or it could have been the onions in here. Damn those onions.
 
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :
 
Welcome back Martin!

(And Doublethink - very impressed. As long as that isn't patronising, because it's genuine admiration.)
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0