Well, first and foremost....it generally considered poor taste to post logs of Chatterbox conversations without first obtaining permission from each person you're quoting. Given the number of people you've originally quoted, I suspect you neglected this step. Please be more considerate of your fellow community members before doing so again.

Getting back on track, people are usually (briefly) denied Chatter privileges when they've been obviously rude, abusive, needlessly inflammatory, or have otherwise exhibited anti-social behavior. Now, I came in on the conversation near the time at the start of your log, so I missed any earlier comments you made in the conversation. If, as you say, you were misinterpreted, then it's entirely possible that you were inappropriately limited. However, I seem to recall some, er...um..., ah, moments a few days back that led to similar sanctions. It's entirely possible that given this previous behavior, your comment was interpreted in a bad light.

Is it fair? Perhaps not...but it's how things work. People tend to assume things based on one's behavior. If one acts up, others may expect one to act up again. As they say in sales, "You never get a second chance to make a first impression."

It's regrettable that people aren't fair all of the time. However, it's something we learn to live with in polite society. We try to correct mistakes in the Monastery, but since the membership still (generally) consists of humans, mistakes do happen.

If it were me, I would learn from the past and try to behave in ways that you wish to be perceived. It'll take time, but you may be able to offset any ill-conceived perceptions through useful, effective--and repeated--contributions to the Monastery.

In the mean time, I noticed that your question was reaped at one time (meaning at least five monks thought you were being obnoxious). Given its current Reputation, others did, too. So, your comment did not come across as innocently as you claim to have hoped. Your post has (as of this writing) been "unreaped," illustrating one of the recovery mechanisms I mentioned earlier. I doubt you're going to get much more of a break (or apology) than that.

And, for the record, I didn't limit your access to the Chatterbox; I don't have the power to do so. However, I have noticed that when people have their CB access limited, it's generally due to the anti-social behavior. Remember, many of us are working programmers with families. We try to keep things professional. I'm replying now in the hopes that you are tying to learn the community and how to be a useful member of it.

As far as your handle goes, well, it's not one I would have chosen. To each their own, I guess. If you think other may have a problem with it, I note that it's still early enough in your "career" here that you could choose a new handle and start from scratch without much impact.

--f

Update: Edited to make sense after the original node was cleaned up a bit.

And, for the record, I didn't limit your access to the Chatterbox; I don't have the power to do so. However, I have noticed that when people have their CB access limited, it's generally due to the anti-social behavior. Remember, many of us are working programmers with families. We try to keep things professional. I'm replying now in the hopes that you are tying to learn the community and how to be a useful member of it.

What a great paragraph, had me in stitches for ages.
'working programmers with families' are you for real?

I'm glad that whomever booted you was so fast.

____________________
Jeremy
I didn't believe in evil until I dated it.

What I would like to mention though Sexy Nun is demands in this community (as well as most other environments that you will find), are often met with something other than that which you desire.