#1 ·
It’s an undeniable fact—long-time forum veterans get away with things that regular users aren't even allowed to attempt. A perfect example is those semi-private chats where anyone unfamiliar with the unwritten rules gets labeled as an "outsider."
For instance—take our ever-present Nicholas King—he apparently takes issue with the sarcasm I liberally sprinkle throughout discussions regarding Jewish topics. Yet, I haven't noticed any of his own posts, which are practically drenched in sarcasm and cynicism, being deleted.
To the gentleman who claims what I wrote was nonsense—here is my response, which was, of course, deleted—so I'll just improvise:
"Of course, having an honest conversation is senseless... It's much more meaningful to find out from your daughter that your husband has a young mistress..."
Addressing the moderator on duty here:
Emily Martin says:
"Was my post deleted where I quoted Nicholas King and denied that the conversation was senseless, or is it just not showing up for me?"
The answer:
Deleted. There’s really no point in engaging once things cross certain lines of bickering.
A recent addition to this argument is the warning I received on the "Affairs and Infidelity" thread.
Because I dared to address another user directly—sharing a bit about myself and how I communicate—I told a certain "privileged" member that I wasn't interested in her opinion on the matter and had no intention of typing about her or her Car. (That's a nod to a famous commercial, by the way!)
And sure enough—my reply to her post, which remains perfectly intact, was wiped away. Naturally, the warning followed. I didn't bother appealing, though—I don't think appeals are any more useful than pressing a pedestrian button at a red light.
Question:
How many years of seniority or how many posts does one need to accumulate before they're allowed to use the exact same sarcasm or irony as the protected veterans?
Or perhaps—how can one respond in the same tone without being branded a bicker, a troll, or someone who isn't being serious?
For instance—take our ever-present Nicholas King—he apparently takes issue with the sarcasm I liberally sprinkle throughout discussions regarding Jewish topics. Yet, I haven't noticed any of his own posts, which are practically drenched in sarcasm and cynicism, being deleted.
To the gentleman who claims what I wrote was nonsense—here is my response, which was, of course, deleted—so I'll just improvise:
"Of course, having an honest conversation is senseless... It's much more meaningful to find out from your daughter that your husband has a young mistress..."
Addressing the moderator on duty here:
Emily Martin says:
"Was my post deleted where I quoted Nicholas King and denied that the conversation was senseless, or is it just not showing up for me?"
The answer:
Deleted. There’s really no point in engaging once things cross certain lines of bickering.
A recent addition to this argument is the warning I received on the "Affairs and Infidelity" thread.
Because I dared to address another user directly—sharing a bit about myself and how I communicate—I told a certain "privileged" member that I wasn't interested in her opinion on the matter and had no intention of typing about her or her Car. (That's a nod to a famous commercial, by the way!)
And sure enough—my reply to her post, which remains perfectly intact, was wiped away. Naturally, the warning followed. I didn't bother appealing, though—I don't think appeals are any more useful than pressing a pedestrian button at a red light.
Question:
How many years of seniority or how many posts does one need to accumulate before they're allowed to use the exact same sarcasm or irony as the protected veterans?
Or perhaps—how can one respond in the same tone without being branded a bicker, a troll, or someone who isn't being serious?