babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Maysie my comment was not snarky. Feel free to take it at face value. I asked Cueball two questions upon which I would appreciate his opinion.
ETA: Cueball answered my questions by PM.
It's off topic in this thread. If you have nothing to contribute to this thread but off-topic discussions about babble etiquette, please just don't post in the thread. That includes any post you might be tempted to make after reading this one.
Thanks.
thread drift/ I asked a serious question, I received a serious answer via PM. I resent being accused by two moderators of being snarky. Is this the new Babble we are trying to build?/ End thread drift.
Caissa, okay, now you can just stay out of the thread entirely. That is not a request. That is an editorial decision on my part, that your comments are disruptive in this thread.
And what pray tell will the consequences be? A suspension, a banning? If moderators want to objectively review the comments in this thread they will find that my two simple questions are far from being egregious.
Maysie's comment and your intervention Michelle arise from the difficulty with reading tone on the internet. I asked Cueball two simple questions. He obviously thought they were simple because he responded to them via PM. If I meant to be snarky, I would have used an appropriate emoticon. I value Cueball's opinion on this question because he left over the tone and seemed to be getting a rough ride upthread.
Keeping with the thread title I feel like I'm being oppressed by two moderators in this thread and am speaking on my own behalf.
"I think it refers to status as opposed to gender or biological sex. For example, from what I hear, men in prison are assigned the role of females. Once they are percieved " as like" women, even though everyone knows full well that they are man, they have female status and are rapable."
The start of the second sentence ; "For, example, from what I hear" is a great example of how not to speak on behalf of the oppressed. This person is speaking on a subject they have claimed no personal knowledge of and has drawn conclusions from anecdotal evidence without citing any sources or studies. IMO it is neither respectful of people in prisons nor adds anything to the discussion except perpetuating stereotypical images of incarcerated people gleaned from shows like "Oz."
Fine. Whatever, Caissa. I see what you're doing now. This is simply an exercise to prove your point that moderators should be suspending or banning people.
Since this thread is almost full and off topic anyhow, I'll just respond to you, Caissa, by saying that if you can't stay on topic in a thread, we'll ask you to stay out of it. And if you keep posting in it, maybe we'll just start deleting any and all posts you post after we've asked you to stay out of a thread.
Honestly? I don't know. I thought we were all adult enough not to play these stupid, juvenile games. And most of us are. But perhaps it's the people who complained the most about the moderators not being able to suspend or ban people who recognized that THEY are the ones without enough self control to act like adults on the boards without the mods treating them like children.
I'm going to do what I usually never do, and give myself the last word, since I doubt this thread will get back on topic again before a hundred posts.