Well, that was surreal.

[conuly]

I don't think I've ever been 100% in the right before.

http://vintage-ads.livejournal.com/4187577.html

Apparently, it is wrong to tell people you were offended, it is wrong to explain why somebody else might be offended, it is wrong to know more about holidays or (to judge from the deleted comment) DST than the moderator or share information that might be useful or interesting on... wild leap here, probably ANY subject, it's wrong to reply calmly to other people as they get more and more hysterical, it is wrong (deleted comment again) not to snark back at somebody who just attacked you, and it's wrong to have trouble reading the aforementioned hysterical comments. I will concede to misreading one of the first comments I replied to, but it really is hard to find the words through a smokescreen of redundant question marks and exclamation points. Honestly, I wouldn't let Eva put that many in a paragraph! Refusing to throw a tantrum is way more trollish than yelling and screaming, I guess. And in this bizarro world, keeping your cool and trying to explain your position is both more offensive and more signaling that you "enjoy" being offended than throwing a screaming hissy fit and insulting anybody who disagrees with you. Plus, it's wrong.

It's probably also wrong to rejoin a comm after being removed, but at least that taught her the difference between remove and ban : )

It's a pity, because despite the fact that half the comm refuses to use lj cuts it's actually a fun resource. Gone, forevermore, because some people would rather wallow in their own ignorance. (I never used that phrasing, but now I think I ought to have. I always love a chance to accuse people of wallowing in their own ignorance. I love the image it brings up. And if you can get banned for saying things like "Halloween wasn't widespread until relatively recently" you might as well have more fun first.)

Is it wrong to see if anything interesting is happening on the DW mirror? I wouldn't join in if it is, just... read.

Comments

[marveen.livejournal.com]

Here we got a couple dozen kids (pretty much all that live in walking distance). The under-fives were escorted by parents.

The second wave was alone or in pairs, ages about seven to twelve or so, and costumed.

The third wave was teenagers wearing street clothes with a smear of "blood" somewhere, in groups. When asked, they announced themselves to be zombies.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

That sounds like a pretty traditional Trick-or-Treat - are you in a small town, or a suburb, or what?

I get the impression that trick-or-treat got its first big popularity in the small towns of the Midwest in the '30's - it really is a 'town thing', doesn't work so well in either the city or the country. But it was the vast suburban tracts of the Baby Boom where it took on a much larger scope: miles and miles of streets of houses, three to six children in almost every house - so every house was getting several hundred trick-or-treaters.

[marveen.livejournal.com]

We're in one of those weird little clusters that is a suburb without an urb. ;-) It's a small housing development six miles from the city limits and two or three miles to the next cluster.