Moderator: Carleas
OK, so you've called him a twit, and here more clearly.MagsJ wrote:Oh no.. he thinks that I'm a rubbish Philosopher, so he's the twit.
yes, I noticed that, and as I said 'I suggested in that thread he not mention your name, as you requested.'. I don't appreciate being implicated (baited) in his thread to Carleas, just so he can call me an R victim. How did I even figure in that thread?
I missed that part. But what he does and what a moderator do can both be wrong, and I would hold a moderator to a higher standard.Such threads as this are enabling him in continuing to do that.. did you not see where he said I wasn’t a (good) Philosopher? but you want to debate me..? that should be telling of his real intentions right there Karpel, or is it only I who sees this?
Did you see how carefully I worded it to Carleas? That it was hard to get the context 'so perhaps I am misunderstanding'?. And in this case you called him a twit and 'this guy's too funny'', iow mocking him in the third person to another member. I did not write to Carleas and say that Mags is being worse than Ecmandu or that her irritation with him is not justified. I am specifically writing about a moderator's post. It's not me picking the bad guy. I mean, jeez, I suggested he leave you alone, not escalate with you or Carleas and that his argument justifying it was not logical. If I missed some other thing he said to you is not really relevant, because my point to Carleas is not Mags is acting less well her than Ecmandu. That kind of comparison is irrelevant to my issue of what a moderator does and the post I thought went over the line.That is looking to be the case.. in you not joining up the dots, and so coming up with your own assertions.. at my expense. It’s not the first time you’ve jumped to wrong assertions.
I didn't say it was initiated by you. You requested it and I referred to your doing this and suggested he simply do as you ask, that it was a consent violation he could avoid. His response to you was that we cannot avoid consent violation. Perhaps in some general sense this is true, but it was disingenous of him to say this because in this instance he could easily have avoided it.And no, my asking him to not mention me in his posts was not initiated by you.
You're a moderator. I think that should be an open discussion. Carleas can instruct me to use the report function for moderators and I'll do as he suggests. Notice that you are complaining about Ecmandu above. In the thread in question, I asked suggested to him to not escalate with you or Carleas and to grant your request not to be mentioned. I did not take his side against you at all.My mention had nothing to do with the topic, and was simply plonked into the middle of the OP.. so baiting. What is your intention in creating these (enabling) threads?
Why not just use the report function? or are such threads as these ‘da new trend’..?
MagsJ wrote:I called the guy a twit..
...
Hardly bad (Moderator) behaviour.
MagsJ wrote:this allows him to mention (bait) whomever he wants to, with no regard for their want to not be mentioned in an obvious baiting attempt.
Carleas wrote:MagsJ wrote:I called the guy a twit..
...
Hardly bad (Moderator) behaviour.
Yeah, it kind of is bad moderator behavior. It's bad user behavior. You're just directly insulting him. I'm not sure what I'm missing that makes this some shade of grey.
MagsJ wrote:Carleas wrote:MagsJ wrote:I called the guy a twit..
...
Hardly bad (Moderator) behaviour.
Yeah, it kind of is bad moderator behavior. It's bad user behavior. You're just directly insulting him. I'm not sure what I'm missing that makes this some shade of grey.
„
History and Etymology for twit
Verb
Middle English atwiten to reproach, from Old English ætwītan, from æt at + wītan to reproach; akin to Old High German wīzan to punish, Old English witan to know”
I guess anything’s insulting, if we want it to be.. in the UK it’s quite common for us to say “Im such a twit” when we do something silly, so we do not hold our own selves beyond reproach.. a self-correcting tool, if you will.
I added to my previous post btw..
MagsJ wrote:in the UK it’s quite common for us to say “Im such a twit” when we do something silly
Carleas wrote:Yes, in retrospect it's clear from context that you used the word 'twit' not with its modern derogatory meaning, but rather with the meaning of Old English ætwītan. "I called the guy a [to reproach].."
Carleas wrote:MagsJ wrote:in the UK it’s quite common for us to say “Im such a twit” when we do something silly
It's quite common for me to say "I'm such a fucking moron", but it would still be an insult for me to call someone else a fucking moron.
Carleas wrote:Twit is an insult in every form of English. It might not be a "big" insult, but it is, and was clearly intended to be, an insult.
Peter, your comment is irrelevant.
Ecmandu, you are not helping.
Arc, you are basically correct.
Locking this thread. Mags, you should respond.
MagsJ wrote:The above has been noted.
MagsJ wrote:Moving forward.. may I suggest that the Report function be used to report such matters in the future, as that is what the function is there for...
Carleas wrote:MagsJ wrote:The above has been noted.
I'm not trying to educate you about English, I'm trying to get you to acknowledge that you crossed a line in your post.
MagsJ wrote:Moving forward.. may I suggest that the Report function be used to report such matters in the future, as that is what the function is there for...
The report function is an option, but people should still feel free to make threads like these in Meta. This is part of what Meta is for.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users