TubaDiva, you may have missed this.

[magellan01]

Last Friday I reported a post and the only action taken was that the thread was closed (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=622674). Within the existing ATMB thread I have (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=622749) (Post #10) inquiring of tomndebb, I added this:

I also reported his post late last night. Then this morning I see that:

1) the thread is closed
2) no warning or admonishment was issued to An Gadai
3) a comment by TubaDiva tells AG and I to take it to the pit

Questions for TubaDiva:

- why wasn't an Gadia warned or admonished?
- what posts of mine in that thread were pit worthy? Or near pit worthy?


I thought it was easier to just include this question in the other thread, but I assume now that you haven't seen it. So this thread is just to direct you there. Ideally, you can answer it in the other thread and just close this one.

Thanks.

[Fear Itself]

And while you are at it, start handing out warnings for using "you and your ilk", which is a bald-faced personal insult.

[TubaDiva]

I have been out of town and I didn't see this earlier.

I closed the thread because it was an argument that started elsewhere and had made its way to About This Message Board, where it was becoming more heated. About This Message Board is not the Pit, you're not supposed to tussle with other posters here.

If you have a problem with An Gadai -- or anyone else -- the Pit is where you should be. Not here.

About This Message Board is not an appropriate forum to re-fight battles/rehash arguments from other SDMB areas. When we find such a thread in ATMB we will generally close it down.

While we could probably revisit the thread and invoke counseling/action I'm going to give it all a pass.

[TubaDiva]

And while you are at it, start handing out warnings for using "you and your ilk", which is a bald-faced personal insult.You and your ilk would say things like that.

What is "ilk" anyway? :D

[magellan01]

I have been out of town and I didn't see this earlier.

I closed the thread because it was an argument that started elsewhere and had made its way to About This Message Board, where it was becoming more heated. About This Message Board is not the Pit, you're not supposed to tussle with other posters here.

If you have a problem with An Gadai -- or anyone else -- the Pit is where you should be. Not here.

About This Message Board is not an appropriate forum to re-fight battles/rehash arguments from other SDMB areas. When we find such a thread in ATMB we will generally close it down.

While we could probably revisit the thread and invoke counseling/action I'm going to give it all a pass.

Huh? I was not carrying over a discussion. I don't even recall engaging An Gadai. Even if I had (which I don't think I did) all I did was question him on what he posted. Here's the original exchange:

It's not that subjective a thing really. OPs that talk about scientific proof that one "race" is stupider than another shouldn't be tolerated.Why? I'm sure that if you took measurement of the races as far as height and weight, head size, etc, they wouldn't all be precisely equal. Therefore they could be ranked. Why is it so hard to accept that genetic differences might manifest themselves in physical performance? Or intelligence?

It's quite something that a members of a clearly left-leaning debate board would want to quash views that they are uncomfortable with. Why can't this stuff be discussed? What are you so afraid of? Seriously.

Where's the Pit-worthy stuff? The "tussling"? And here are the rest of my posts in that thread:

How surprising! You ignored the content of my post and instead of trying to explain your position you use sarcasm in some transparent and lame attempt to seize some moral high ground. Results: massive fail.

I'm still wondering what you're so afraid of. Or do you only like science when you think you'll like what it reveals?

Oh, almost forgot. Are you aware that it is against board rules to call other posters racists? Or do you and your ilk not care that such ad hominems are not only out of bounds, but do nothing to actually argue your point? Please, share how you and your ilk think. I find it fascinating.

Keep in mind, these two posts by me were preceded by this one by An Gadai—in clear violation of board rules: (bolding mine)

OMG I'm afraid of your equation that proves dem niggers are stupid. Except you don't have any such proof of anything, because your concept of race, and that of every other board racist, is simplistic and flawed. And it doesn't seem any amount of cited evidence that highlights your misconceptions (of which there's a truckload) will persuade you, or your ilk, that your ideas are ill-founded, small-minded, bullshit.

As I asked earlier, and the reason I had reported the post last Friday, where's the Warning or admonition to An Gadai. Other mods have stated that one my NOT refer to another board member as a racist, except in the Pit. So, why didn't you come down on An Gadai for such a flagrant violation?

Next question, what did I write that was pit-worthy? As you know, these discussion don't stay on a track one centimeter wide.

[Marley23]

Where's the Pit-worthy stuff? The "tussling"?
Yes. She said clearly that the argument between you and An Gadai should be taken to the Pit instead of continuing in ATMB.

Other mods have stated that one my NOT refer to another board member as a racist, except in the Pit.
Oh, really? (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=14206601#post14206601)

Do not accuse a poster of being a racist in Great Debates.

[ /Moderating ]
There is no board-wide rule against calling another poster a racist; it's something we discourage in Great Debates. From what I can tell, tomndebb has been consistent on this point and I think I have, too. And you were posting in ATMB. While we don't allow insults in ATMB, we have to give posters a little bit of latitude in asking questions about the rules. (For example you can't call another poster a troll or a jerk in any forum except the Pit, but in ATMB you can link to a post or a thread and ask if a certain poster was trolling or being a jerk in that thread.)

[magellan01]

Yes. She said clearly that the argument between you and An Gadai should be taken to the Pit instead of continuing in ATMB.


Oh, really? (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=14206601#post14206601)


There is no board-wide rule against calling another poster a racist; it's something we discourage in Great Debates. From what I can tell, tomndebb has been consistent on this point and I think I have, too. And you were posting in ATMB. While we don't allow insults in ATMB, we have to give posters a little bit of latitude in asking questions about the rules. (For example you can't call another poster a troll or a jerk in any forum except the Pit, but in ATMB you can link to a post or a thread and ask if a certain poster was trolling or being a jerk in that thread.)

Please.

Is "racist" an insult or not. Answer: "yes". Therefore, even by your own calculation An Gadai was in clear violation of the ATMB rules. I reported it and no Warning or admonishment was issued to him. I must admit that I was quite surprised by this, given how blatant his violation. But I am getting less and less surprised at this bullshit. Ignorance being fought and all that.

You know, if you guys want to stay on that tightrope and continually try to argue with a straight face that the moderation of this board isn't badly biased, you should just suck it up and accept that every once in a while you're going to have to not let flagrant violations by those who share your sensibilities skate by. Come on, man. At least try to make it a little believable!!

[Irishman]

Wearing my TubaDiva hat* for a moment (it doesn't fit well, but I'll pretend), I read in that thread that An Gadai asking why we don't outlaw certain kinds of threads/arguments. Marley, samclem, and tomndebb all chime in that it isn't going to happen, with various responses about why.

In the process, An Gadai tries to justify his request with the statement that certain claims are not based on science, that the claimed science to support their position is flawed and repeatedly demonstrated.

You came along and replied to that claim. At that point, the ATMB thread is moving away from "why don't we ban this topic" to rehashing the arguments of the topic. That right there is marginal. I say marginal, because I can see an argument that An Gadai wanted to justify why the threads should be banned, and thus that makes the basis for that claim seem material. Which it would be if the mods were giving it any merit. Except the mods were not accepting the claim as the basis for a decision, and responding to An Gadai's request in the negative based on other matters.

So An Gadai responds to your counterargument with his Pit-worthy reply. They you replied to him with a counter finger-pointing.

Now I grant you that you didn't steep to the name-calling level that An Gadai did, but to a non-participant, there's a fair amount of back and forth going on right there.
Couple the rehashed argument that really should be in GD instead of ATMB with An Gadai getting name-cally and you kinda sorta giving it back, and I suspect TubaDiva felt "Both of you cut it out" and closed the thread. Especially since the answer had already been given - No, we're not automatically closing/locking threads on this topic.

Now not wearing my TubaDiva hat (she'll appreciate that), to me it doesn't feel like your comments per se are Pitworthy, but the focus of the argument was aimed at An Gadai rather than his argument (specifically that "you and your ilk" business), so that is Pit territory.
-----
*It should be obvious, I'm not TubaDiva, I'm not a mod or admin, I'm merely trying to guess at her perspective. I don't really have a TubaDiva hat. TubaDiva isn't a hat. I don't really like hats, anyway.

[Marley23]

Is "racist" an insult or not. Answer: "yes".
While I hold out little hope this will satisfy you, it is not an insult. It's a personal comment that we discourage, but it is not a personal insult. And again, tomndebb's instruction said not to call someone a racist in Great Debates, and when An Gadaí called you a racist, the post was not in Great Debates.

[Irishman]

Marley, while there may need to be some leeway for discussing context in ATMB, I don't think An Gadai's comment fits that bill.

OMG I'm afraid of your equation that proves dem niggers are stupid. Except you don't have any such proof of anything, because your concept of race, and that of every other board racist, is simplistic and flawed. And it doesn't seem any amount of cited evidence that highlights your misconceptions (of which there's a truckload) will persuade you, or your ilk, that your ideas are ill-founded, small-minded, bullshit.

That is not characterizing the content of the post, it is labeling board posters, including specifically magellan01. That comment seems to me to serve no purpose but to inflame.

[Marley23]

And that's why the posters were told to take it to the Pit. Maybe it would make more sense if I put it this way: magellan01 is asserting that "racist" is treated as a personal insult here (it isn't) and that the mods usually warn posters who use it (we don't).

[TubaDiva]

Wearing my TubaDiva hat* for a moment (it doesn't fit well, but I'll pretend), I read in that thread that An Gadai asking why we don't outlaw certain kinds of threads/arguments. Marley, samclem, and tomndebb all chime in that it isn't going to happen, with various responses about why.

In the process, An Gadai tries to justify his request with the statement that certain claims are not based on science, that the claimed science to support their position is flawed and repeatedly demonstrated.

You came along and replied to that claim. At that point, the ATMB thread is moving away from "why don't we ban this topic" to rehashing the arguments of the topic. That right there is marginal. I say marginal, because I can see an argument that An Gadai wanted to justify why the threads should be banned, and thus that makes the basis for that claim seem material. Which it would be if the mods were giving it any merit. Except the mods were not accepting the claim as the basis for a decision, and responding to An Gadai's request in the negative based on other matters.

So An Gadai responds to your counterargument with his Pit-worthy reply. They you replied to him with a counter finger-pointing.

Now I grant you that you didn't steep to the name-calling level that An Gadai did, but to a non-participant, there's a fair amount of back and forth going on right there.
Couple the rehashed argument that really should be in GD instead of ATMB with An Gadai getting name-cally and you kinda sorta giving it back, and I suspect TubaDiva felt "Both of you cut it out" and closed the thread. Especially since the answer had already been given - No, we're not automatically closing/locking threads on this topic.

Now not wearing my TubaDiva hat (she'll appreciate that), to me it doesn't feel like your comments per se are Pitworthy, but the focus of the argument was aimed at An Gadai rather than his argument (specifically that "you and your ilk" business), so that is Pit territory.
-----
*It should be obvious, I'm not TubaDiva, I'm not a mod or admin, I'm merely trying to guess at her perspective. I don't really have a TubaDiva hat. TubaDiva isn't a hat. I don't really like hats, anyway.Actually, you wear it well.

And I thank you. I would tip my hat to you but you're wearing it. :)

You have summed up very nicely the entire situation. Which I thought was clear to everyone, which is why I didn't think I needed to expound on it.

[An Gadaí]

OMG, my ears are burning.

[twickster]

OMG, my ears are burning.

Wash carefully -- who knows what was on/in that hat.

[Chronos]

What is "ilk" anyway?It's like a møøse.

[Little Nemo]

What is "ilk" anyway?It's like a moose.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

[Little Nemo]

No fair, Chronos, using your ability to control the flow of time to ninja me.

[magellan01]

While I hold out little hope this will satisfy you, it is not an insult. It's a personal comment that we discourage, but it is not a personal insult.

:eek: Say WHAT?!!! Calling someone a racist is not an insult? Very interesting. Then, pray tell, why is it against the rules in GD?

You're living on an other planet if you think calling someone a racist isn't an insult. That may be not only THE most ridiculous comment you've ever made, but that has ever appeared on these boards—period. But please, by all means, let's hear you're rationale. Here, let me get you a bigger shovel. I can't wait to here this.

And again, tomndebb's instruction said not to call someone a racist in Great Debates, and when An Gadaí called you a racist, the post was not in Great Debates.

Ahem. I know where the post was. That's why I got Tuba is involved.

[magellan01]

Oh, I forgot this regarding your other dodge,
from here. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=623061) Post #15. (bolding mine)

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

[Bryan Ekers]

You're living on an other planet if you think calling someone a racist isn't an insult. That may be not only THE most ridiculous comment you've ever made, but that has ever appeared on these boards—period.

I've seen way ridiculouser. "Racist" doesn't strike me as an insult, but it's something the accuser should be prepared to back up with examples of the alleged racist's racism and it's greatly overused, like accusations of "hypocrite".

[Lute Skywatcher]

While I hold out little hope this will satisfy you, it is not an insult. It's a personal comment that we discourage, but it is not a personal insult. :eek: Say WHAT?!!! Calling someone a racist is not an insult? Very interesting. Then, pray tell, why is it against the rules in GD? Personal comments of any kind are out of line in GD. You haven't figured that out in four years?

[magellan01]

Personal comments of any kind are out of line in GD. You haven't figured that out in four years?

I don't think I'm the one not figuring things out.

[Bryan Ekers]

Well, if the various sides all maintain that they've "figured it out" and still disagree, I guess that's as far as it can go.

[Electric Warrior]

I think it's similar to how you can't accuse someone of lying in GD, which as far as I can tell is OK in other boards.

[magellan01]

I think it's similar to how you can't accuse someone of lying in GD, which as far as I can tell is OK in other boards.

Except that name calling and personal insults are a violation in any forum other than the Pit. We;ll see what Marley or Tuba come back with this time. Marley might take a while though,. He's probably figuring out how to operate the backhoe so he doesn't strain himself.

[Monty]

Am I the only one that sees this thread as part of the slowest suicide by mod in board history?

[Bryan Ekers]

Am I the only one that sees this thread as part of the slowest suicide by mod in board history?

Possibly. He's starting to look like someone who's daring the moderators, rather than questioning them. I look forward to his next ATMB thread.

[Marley23]

:eek: Say WHAT?!!! Calling someone a racist is not an insult? Very interesting. Then, pray tell, why is it against the rules in GD?

Personal comments of any kind are out of line in GD.

And there's your answer. It is not an insult. It is a comment about the poster rather than his or her argument, and those comments are discouraged in GD.

[Marley23]

Am I the only one that sees this thread as part of the slowest suicide by mod in board history?
It's getting kind of tedious, but I'm not going to kill myself over it.

[PlainJain]

That may be not only THE most ridiculous comment you've ever made, but that has ever appeared on these boards—period.
Not even in the running.

Re the racist bit: There are many people who would self-identify a such so it isn't inherently an insult.

If I called someone a tea-partiest (because in my eyes they really came off as one - though they might not think of themselves as one), they may not like it one bit, but that doesn't mean it's an insult.

[Bryan Ekers]

I'd be offended.


It should be "tea-partier".

[An Gadaí]

I'd be offended.


It should be "tea-partier".

But what if you were the tea-partiest person there?

[Bryan Ekers]

Then I'd be racist.



Or so I hear.

[Darth Panda]

But what if you were the tea-partiest person there?

Wouldn't the proper way to refer to such a person be the tea-partyingest mofo?

[magellan01]

And there's your answer. It is not an insult. It is a comment about the poster rather than his or her argument, and those comments are discouraged in GD.

I must be in Bizzaro World. To recap:

1) this is not about GD, this is about ATMB (so I don't know what the heck Lute Skywatcher thinks he was contributing. And then you site his response?! Yep, Bizzaro.)
2) insults and name calling are only allowed in the Pit
3) ATMB is not the same as the Pit, therefore insults and name calling are not allowed. Don't believe me? Here: (bolding mine)

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

4) "Racist", as used by Ad Gadai, was clearly an insult—or if you prefer, an instance of name calling—as it was directed to another poster.
5) since it was a violation, and a flagrant one at that, and it was reported to the Mods, a warning or admonishment was due to him
6) that didn't happen. TubaDiva skirts the issue and then pulls a disappearing act, and
7) you still refuse to admit that it was a violation. Which means you need to be pointed—once again—to something you should already be aware of, given your role as a Mod:

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

8) ?


Oh, if you still want to try to claim that it is not an instance of insult or name calling, explain why it is a violation in the Pit. You can't have it both ways. Unless you want to take Logic and throw it in a food processor.

[TubaDiva]

You are missing the greater point, which is

Go argue in another forum and not in About This Message Board.

Because this is not an appropriate place to conduct your argument.

[Marley23]

4) "Racist", as used by Ad Gadai, was clearly an insult—or if you prefer, an instance of name calling—as it was directed to another poster.
The problem is that it's not an insult (as I explained upthread) and it's not name-calling. It's a comment about another poster, but it's not an insult or name-calling like "stupid" or any of the more creative variants. I think it's about time you gave up on this attempted gotcha.

[Superdude]

magellan01, if I speak bluntly, reading your misplaced anger in this thread reminds me of the movie Overboard. Allow me to quote:
You know what your problem is? You are so goddamn bored, you have to *invent* things to bitch about! You don't have a single thing to do on this earth except for your hair! The closet was fine, you just needed something to fill up your useless, nail-polishing, toe-polishing, rich bitch, sun-tanning days!

[magellan01]

The problem is that it's not an insult (as I explained upthread) and it's not name-calling. It's a comment about another poster, but it's not an insult or name-calling like "stupid" or any of the more creative variants. I think it's about time you gave up on this attempted gotcha.

Ha. So it all comes down to this? You're going to maintain that it's not an insult to call a poster a racist. Unfuckingbelievable. But if you want to carry that flag, you go right ahead. Just don't be surprised when you get laughed at and dismissed for being so blatantly biased. Then again, that kind of behavior is likely to get you a promotion around here.

[magellan01]

You are missing the greater point, which is

Go argue in another forum and not in About This Message Board.

Because this is not an appropriate place to conduct your argument.

Wait. I thought this is what this forum was for...to discuss the board, it's moderation, etc. No?

[Marley23]

Again, magellan01, calling someone "racist" is a personal comment and is discouraged, but it is not a personal insult. I've addressed this issue before. Just to muddy the waters, tomndebb does describe it as name calling in the posts I'm linking to.

If someone was that upfront about it I don't think I'd object, but I'd rather see posters take their arguments apart than just call them racist. We have some posters with views that are racist or near-racist. They like to complain that people are calling them racist to shut them up, but Dopers rarely accuse them of racism.

I mentioned I found a few instances of "racist" being moderated. They're here: from Great Debates last December (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=11847743#post11847743), one in MPSIMS in March (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12276223) (although this could be about the tone, not just the use of the word racist), and another in GD in January 2009 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10670426#post10670426).

brickbacon was asking, in essence, if it's okay to call a poster a racist in Great Debates if it's true, or if the poster acknowledges it. I think tomndebb and I agree that in both cases, it isn't because it's still a personal remark.

[magellan01]

magellan01, if I speak bluntly, reading your misplaced anger in this thread reminds me of the movie Overboard. Allow me to quote:

My hair? What's wrong with my hair?!!!

This is so trouble some because its so common. If I put a toe near the line, Notes Warnings, pre Warnings. Other posters (who just happen to share the mods' more liberal sensibilities) can can jump over the line with both feet and give the finger and ...crickets.

It's just not even-handed. And if you were on the receiving end of the calls always going one way, you might appear to be overly upset, as well. The fact that Der Trihs gets admonished as seldom as he does is testament to what I've just said. But we needn't look elsewhere. The example in this very thread is flagrant enough, and the response from the mods tortured enough to say it all.

[Marley23]

This is so trouble some because its so common. If I put a toe near the line, Notes Warnings, pre Warnings. Other posters (who just happen to share the mods' more liberal sensibilities) can can jump over the line with both feet and give the finger and ...crickets.
Both of you got a mod note, but don't let that get in the way.

[magellan01]

Again, magellan01, calling someone "racist" is a personal comment and is discouraged, but it is not a personal insult. I've addressed this issue before. Just to muddy the waters, tomndebb does describe it as name calling in the posts I'm linking to.

Thank you for going through the trouble of assembling those.

He calls it name calling because it is—at minimum! It's clearly an attack on the poster himself, one intended to denigrate. Combine that with the explanation from C K Dexter Haven, and you have a clear and flagrant violation by An Gadai.

[Marley23]

It's clearly an attack on the poster himself, one intended to denigrate. Combine that with the explanation from C K Dexter Haven, and you have a clear and flagrant violation by An Gadai.
If the first three times didn't do it, I'm thinking I don't need to bother with a fourth.

[magellan01]

Both of you got a mod note, but don't let that get in the way.

No, I won't, because that just exacerbated the injustice. The only snark I sent his way was the "and your ilk", which by itself is no big deal. It's used all quite often and I've never once seen it draw a comment from a mod. I don't particularly like it, so I used the same phrase right back at him. But his clear violation got a pass.

But fine, on a scale of 1 - 10, say we both get a 1.2 for the "and your ilk". But he deserves a 8+ for such a flagrant violation. It's an attack on a poster. It's name calling. And it was not done in the only forum in which that is allowed: the Pit. If I deserved a Note, he deserved a Warning for sure.

[Marley23]

No, I won't, because that just exacerbated the injustice.
You need to get some perspective here. It's just a mod note. You were both included in the note because you were arguing with each other. His tone was less civil, but you were both rearguing the issue in ATMB, and we don't want posters to do that whether they are polite or not. This is not the forum for it. Arguments belong in the relevant forums and personal disputes go in the Pit. We don't usually warn posters for calling each other racists, so An Gadaí got a note and not a warning.

[magellan01]

If the first three times didn't do it, I'm thinking I don't need to bother with a fourth.

Okay, new question.

I understand you think that An Gadai's calling me a racist is not an insult, but are you also claiming that it is not name-calling?

If so, how does that jibe with this?

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

[magellan01]

You need to get some perspective here. It's just a mod note. You were both included in the note because you were arguing with each other. His tone was less civil, but you were both rearguing the issue in ATMB, and we don't want posters to do that whether they are polite or not. This is not the forum for it. Arguments belong in the relevant forums and personal disputes go in the Pit. We don't usually warn posters for calling each other racists, so An Gadaí got a note and not a warning.

It's not the fact that it's a mod not. I've received others that I've not complained about. I've even received Warnings where I could see the problem. The problem here is the inequity. As per my last email, is it your opinion that An Gadai was not engaged in name-calling?

[Marley23]

I understand you think that An Gadai's calling me a racist is not an insult, but are you also claiming that it is not name-calling?
It's not what I think of when I think of the term name calling, since racist can be used in a descriptive or non-insulting way and names like "idiot" can't. But I see that tomndebb and C K Dexter Haven both seem to have lumped it under "name calling" and I understand why. I'd repeat what I said earlier: it's personal commentary and it's discouraged, but it's not something that is going to draw a warning in almost all instances the way other terms will.

[BigT]

Give it up. I honestly agree with you, but if there's one thing that will not happen on this board, that is a previous decision being changed once they've confirmed it. The only thing you can hope for is future modification.

And you haven't hit on the issue du jour, and thus no one else is helping you, so you're unlikely to get that, either.

Still, I prefer this place over places that won't even pretend to be trying to be fair.

[Monty]

Other posters (who just happen to share the mods' more liberal sensibilities) can can jump over the line with both feet and give the finger and ...crickets.

Wouldn't that be "dance over the line"?

[Bryan Ekers]

I applaud the moderators for showing far more patience than I would have.

[Darth Panda]

I applaud the moderators for showing far more patience than I would have.

Eh, patient but wrong isn't very impressive. If someone at work constantly referred to you as a racist, would you just say to yourself "oh, no big deal, that's not an insult?" Anyone claiming it's not name calling or insulting is being purposefully ignorant. magellan01's views are awful in my opinion, and I pretty much can't stand him, but that doesn't make him wrong.

[Bryan Ekers]

Eh, patient but wrong isn't very impressive.

Yeah, but it's a message board, run by the arbitrary likes and dislikes of whoever's paying the bills, and even with that in mind and for the most part, I find the moderation here to be pretty relaxed and evenhanded. magellan could easily set up his own board and "note"/warn/ban on a whim to his heart's content.

If someone at work constantly referred to you as a racist, would you just say to yourself "oh, no big deal, that's not an insult?" Anyone claiming it's not name calling or insulting is being purposefully ignorant.

Well, if the person was sincere, I'd probably think he was nuts or very very immature, and I'd shrug him off or mock him by singing Avenue Q songs to him. If it is an empty insult (and of course how could the determination be anything but arbitrary?), it's a vapid and tepid one, and if it's a supportable claim (i.e. the "racist" has numerous posts about "niggers" and whatnot) then it's just an obvious label.

Heck, if someone wants to call me a racist on this board, I don't care. It just gives me license to question and mock the credibility of that person's ability to evaluate things.

magellan01's views are awful in my opinion, and I pretty much can't stand him, but that doesn't make him wrong.

Well, I could buy that he honesty feels insulted if someone calls him a racist. It's just not clear to me that he (or anyone else so claiming) should get any special consideration for it.

[Darth Panda]

Well, I could buy that he honesty feels insulted if someone calls him a racist. It's just not clear to me that he (or anyone else so claiming) should get any special consideration for it.

I guess that's the difference of opinions here - I don't think preventing one poster from calling another a racist is any different than preventing them from calling another poster an asshole. So, to me, it's not special. I know I'd personally be more insulted if someone called me a racist, rather than an asshole.

[Bryan Ekers]

In any case, since he's started a thread to complain about the unsatisfactory reaction to his posts, and then another thread to complain about the unsatisfactory reaction to his complaint, I look forward to his next thread complaining about the unsatisfactory reaction to his complaint about the unsatisfactory reaction to his complaint about the unsatisfactory reaction to his posts.

[Clothahump]

Wearing my TubaDiva hat* for a moment (it doesn't fit well, but I'll pretend), ...
I don't think Tuba will appreciate you wearing her clothes. This won't end well.

[Irishman]

If I called someone a tea-partiest (...), they may not like it one bit, but that doesn't mean it's an insult.

Nitpick - tea-partyist. ist is the person who does. est is having that quality in the mostest.

With regards to the issue, the histrionics aside, I can sort of feel megellan's pain. "Racist" feels to me like the kind of comment that is an insult. I understand the fine parsing that's being given to say it's a personal remark that has some legitimate descriptive value. Perhaps a parallel is the use of "liar" and "lying" and whatnot - off limits for GD while not explicitly outlawed in other forums.

What I see is a fair comment that An Gadai was a lot more harsh and abusive to megellan than magellan was in response, but they were modded the same. At a certain level, that seems mildly unfair. But I think the staff fully admits that the level of comments were not on par with each other. They also point out that by the way they have been moderating the terms, An Gadai did not cross the threshhold from personal comment to insult. So while is tone was harsher, it wasn't yet to the next level of behavior for moderation. Ergo, TubaDiva dropped a mod note to both of them with regards to the sniping in ATMB.

So let me drop an aknowledgement to megellan for attempting to take the higher road, and not responding with his own brand of insults, "replying in kind". Too many posters take that path, and then get modded for it and complain "but He started it". Magellan didn't do that, he used the sanctioned path of reporting the post. So kudos for that. Sorry this didn't get quite the response you expected/hoped.

That said, continued argument of the point isn't going to go anywhere. You've been heard, your argument has not been accepted. Grumble about it to yourself and move on.

Wait. I thought this is what this forum was for...to discuss the board, it's moderation, etc. No?

She was referring to the argument about whether was justification for racial differences in IQ, not the argument about the moderating about that issue.

[mlees]

What is "ilk" anyway? :D

I got one. It's cute and fuzzy.

[Zoe]

This is not to argue to Marley23's decision, but it is puzzling to me. I had rather be called a bitch or a whore than a racist. I've seen how cruel and crude real racists can be. It is the ultimate in arrogance combined with stupidity and stubbornness. I cannot imagine any sense in which it would not be an insult.

I hope in the future that some reconsideration might be given to this.

[Sparky812]

I got one. It's cute and fuzzy.

a/s/l?

[Czarcasm]

rac·ist
  [rey-sist] Show IPA
noun
1.
a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.
adjective
2.
of or like racists or racism: racist policies; racist attitudes.
It can be used as an insult, but its primary use is as a descriptor.

[Bryan Ekers]

And suppose, just for the sake of argument and in the proper context, one wishes to describe another poster as a dickfaced cheesebrain...?

[villa]

I guess that's the difference of opinions here - I don't think preventing one poster from calling another a racist is any different than preventing them from calling another poster an asshole. So, to me, it's not special. I know I'd personally be more insulted if someone called me a racist, rather than an asshole.

And I'd be more insulted if someone called me a conservative than if they called me an asshole, but that still doesn't make calling someone a conservative off limits.

[Irishman]

Only if they actually have a dick on their face and cheese in their skull.

A better example might be "retarded". That word just means "slowed down". It's original use was a formal way to say "not very bright". But any word that has an objective meaning can become an insult if that meaning has negative connotations.

It's one reason why coming up with new PC labels for things is doomed to failure. Rename retarded as develepmentally challenged, you just get that turned into the equivalent insult.

"You're special", from "special needs".
"You're challenged."

So, if a person is espousing views that some races are superior than others, that view is objectively "racist". So a person espousing those views could objectively be termed a racist. But the connotations that word carries means it will be insulting to some segment of the population, possibly even the one using the word.

A similar example might be pedophile. For an adult that desires or pursues sex with children, that word is accurate. But it can also be thrown out to describe someone who, say, makes a comment about a teenaged celebrity looking cute. Or like the example recently, the accusation if not the word is used to describe the father in a commercial, the one where the parents are trying to decide which kid gets to pick the second show to record on the DVR, and dad makes comments about how pretty their daughter is. In another thread someone decided that is the father having fantasies of killing off his wife and taking his daughter as his new sex partner.

So, sometimes it might be accurate to say someone is a racist, and sometimes that label is just getting thrown out to denigrate the opponent. Sounds like a tough thing to moderate. If you classify it as an insult and bar it, then it hinders actual description of certain views about race. If you don't classify it as an insult, then people throw it around willy-nilly. If you try to evaluate each circumstance on its own merits, you get accused of being arbitrary or biased.

[Czarcasm]

And suppose, just for the sake of argument and in the proper context, one wishes to describe another poster as a dickfaced cheesebrain...?Can one provide a dictionary definition of "dickfaced cheesebrain"?

[magellan01]

Nitpick - tea-partyist. ist is the person who does. est is having that quality in the mostest.

With regards to the issue, the histrionics aside, I can sort of feel megellan's pain. "Racist" feels to me like the kind of comment that is an insult. I understand the fine parsing that's being given to say it's a personal remark that has some legitimate descriptive value. Perhaps a parallel is the use of "liar" and "lying" and whatnot - off limits for GD while not explicitly outlawed in other forums.

What I see is a fair comment that An Gadai was a lot more harsh and abusive to megellan than magellan was in response, but they were modded the same. At a certain level, that seems mildly unfair. But I think the staff fully admits that the level of comments were not on par with each other. They also point out that by the way they have been moderating the terms, An Gadai did not cross the threshhold from personal comment to insult. So while is tone was harsher, it wasn't yet to the next level of behavior for moderation. Ergo, TubaDiva dropped a mod note to both of them with regards to the sniping in ATMB.

So let me drop an aknowledgement to megellan for attempting to take the higher road, and not responding with his own brand of insults, "replying in kind". Too many posters take that path, and then get modded for it and complain "but He started it". Magellan didn't do that, he used the sanctioned path of reporting the post. So kudos for that. Sorry this didn't get quite the response you expected/hoped.

That said, continued argument of the point isn't going to go anywhere. You've been heard, your argument has not been accepted. Grumble about it to yourself and move on.


Thank you for parsing this as carefully as you did. I'd just add that even if the term does not rise to the level of insult (which I still think is absurd), it is still name-calling, an attack on the poster. And THAT is still disallowed in any forum other than the Pit, as per C K Dexter Haven's post:

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

[magellan01]

It can be used as an insult, but its primary use is as a descriptor.

I don't think anyone has claimed that it can only be used as an insult. Do a quick search of the term as used by tomndebb. You'll find plenty of instances where the term is used in discussion by him and others appropriately. But in those instances the term is not used to describe another poster in an attempt to denigrate him or discount their views.

That is not the case with the instance in question. How you can attempt to claim that An Gadai was not attacking me—and that is what you're doing, even if it's unintentional—is mind boggling.

[Czarcasm]

I don't think anyone has claimed that it can only be used as an insult. Do a quick search of the term as used by tomndebb. You'll find plenty of instances where the term is used in discussion by him and others appropriately. But in those instances the term is not used to describe another poster in an attempt to denigrate him or discount their views.

That is not the case with the instance in question. How you can attempt to claim that An Gadai was not attacking me—and that is what you're doing, even if it's unintentional—is mind boggling.If An Gadai thinks that you have racist viewpoints, do you think that he should be able to use the word "racist" to describe you? If not, what word would be an acceptable substitute?

[Cicero]

a/s/l?

I haven't seen that for 10 years.

[magellan01]

If An Gadai thinks that you have racist viewpoints, do you think that he should be able to use the word "racist" to describe you? If not, what word would be an acceptable substitute?

No. He can refer to me as magellan01. No ad hominem necessary, directly or as a descriptor. He can then go on to attack those viewpoints I hold—or he thinks I hold—as vigorously as he likes. You do realize it is possible to do this, right?

So tell me, is it your opinion that he was not using name-calling to denigrate the poster: me?

I'd like to add, if this need to describe me as racist is so strong that he can't control his fingers, he always has the option of going to the pit and letting his freak flag fly. Like I might do when I feel that I need to say more to Der Trihs or another poster I'd like to slap, than is allowed in a particular forum.

[Czarcasm]

No. He can refer to me as magellan01. No ad hominem necessary, directly or as a descriptor. He can then go on to attack those viewpoints I hold—or he thinks I hold—as vigorously as he likes. You do realize it is possible to do this, right?It is also possible to not use words like "liberal", "conservative", and "Religious" to describe people(all of which certain posters have claimed to be insulting to them.)So tell me, is it your opinion that he was not using name-calling to denigrate the poster: me?I don't know if his purpose was to denigrate you or to use the term as a descriptor of what he thinks your views are-I just know that you take it as a denigration.

[magellan01]

It is also possible to not use words like "liberal", "conservative", and "Religious" to describe people(all of which certain posters have claimed to be insulting to them.)

You're kidding. Based on your logic here, one can use the term "pedophile" to describe a poster and you make room for the defense "Oh, I didn't mean it as an insult, I was just the word as a descriptor." Yeesh.

I don't know if his purpose was to denigrate you or to use the term as a descriptor of what he thinks your views are-I just know that you take it as a denigration.

Well, good thing I didn't ask you what you "know" then. I asked you for your opinion. His words are still there. You can read them. And surely you can form an opinion. So, again: (emphasis added)

So tell me, is it your opinion that he was not using name-calling to denigrate the poster: me?

[Czarcasm]

I think that he thinks he was using the word to accurately and precisely describe what he thinks is your viewpoint...but I'm just guessing at this point.

[An Gadaí]

I think that he thinks he was using the word to accurately and precisely describe what he thinks is your viewpoint...but I'm just guessing at this point.

Yes. I'm confused. Is there a less loaded term for describing people who believe in the intellectual or physical superiority of one "race" over another? Racialist?

[Czarcasm]

Yes. I'm confused. Is there a less loaded term for describing people who believe in the intellectual or physical superiority of one "race" over another? Racialist?And here is the apparent conflict: One side is using the word as a dictionary-defined descriptor, and the other side is receiving the word as an intentional insult.

[magellan01]

I think that he thinks he was using the word to accurately and precisely describe what he thinks is your viewpoint...but I'm just guessing at this point.

Okay. Again, what is your opinion?

[magellan01]

Yes. I'm confused. Is there a less loaded term for describing people who believe in the intellectual or physical superiority of one "race" over another? Racialist?

Aside from the FACT that that's not what I believe, you needn't use either term. You can either use the term and not link it to a poster, or address the beliefs I hold—or you think I hold.

It's really that simple.

[Czarcasm]

Okay. Again, what is your opinion?
Um..answered in post #75.

[Czarcasm]

Aside from the FACT that that's not what I believe, you needn't use either term. You can either use the term and not link it to a poster, or address the beliefs I hold—or you think I hold.

It's really that simple.But using that word does address the beliefs he thinks you hold.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Yes. I'm confused. Is there a less loaded term for describing people who believe in the intellectual or physical superiority of one "race" over another? Racialist?

Klingon.

[Bryan Ekers]

Aside from the FACT that that's not what I believe, you needn't use either term. You can either use the term and not link it to a poster, or address the beliefs I hold—or you think I hold.

It's really that simple.

Or you could explain why your views are not racist and, if the person calls you a racist again, simply shrug it off and discontinue arguing that issue with that person.

Taking the high road is simple, too.

[Darth Panda]

I think that he thinks he was using the word to accurately and precisely describe what he thinks is your viewpoint...but I'm just guessing at this point.

If I think your views on this subject are ignorant, can I constantly refer to you as an ignormaus when discussing the topic without it being considered insulting?

Can an ignoramus like you even understand why a 'factual' descriptor that implies characterisitcs with normative implications can be considered insulting in the general sense?

If I think your posts are foolish, can I call you a fool? If I think your posts are jerkish, can I call you a jerk?

[Wilson]

If I think your posts are foolish, can I call you a fool? If I think your posts are jerkish, can I call you a jerk?

And if I think your posts are racist, I'm going to call you a race.

[Arnold Winkelried]

If I think your views on this subject are ignorant, can I constantly refer to you as an ignormaus when discussing the topic without it being considered insulting?

Can an ignoramus like you even understand why a 'factual' descriptor that implies characterisitcs with normative implications can be considered insulting in the general sense?

If I think your posts are foolish, can I call you a fool? If I think your posts are jerkish, can I call you a jerk?Are you trying to say that all descriptive terms can be considered as insults? Or are you trying to say that only some descriptive terms are considered as insults, and that IYHO "racist" is a descriptive term that should be considered as an insult at the board?

ETA: reading the thread, it's clear that you mean the later, that "racist" is an insulting term that should be forbidden outside the Pit. Those terms like racist or sexist or homophobic are borderline, I could see a decision going either way.

[Darth Panda]

And if I think your posts are racist, I'm going to call you a race.

Now, now. I don't need more people running me.

[Darth Panda]

nm. Arnold's edit cleared it up.

[Bryan Ekers]

If I think your posts are foolish, can I call you a fool? If I think your posts are jerkish, can I call you a jerk?

Stop pandering!

[Darth Panda]

Stop pandering!

Just another racist, dismissing my comments because I'm a Panda.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Stop pandering!

Hmm. Is "pimp" an insult?

[magellan01]

But using that word does address the beliefs he thinks you hold.

So, if I think—if I seriously believe—that what he opines is sheer idiocy, I can call him an idiot? Well, that works perfectly doesn't it?

No, no it doesn't. Because then he has the right to defend himself. Except that turns into a discussion that is not ATMB material. Evidently, the very type of thing TubaDiva cautioned me on in this very thread.

It makes sense that such name calling is disallowed outside the Pit because it simply leads to hijacks of "Am not", "Are too.", "Am not.", "Are too." That's not helpful to the forum. So the poster is asked to address what the poster actually says, rather than comment on the poster himself.

Additionally, allowing such nonsense outside the pit just encourages the use of the ad hominem fallacy. It does not help one's argument one iota. It simply seeks to inflame and quash a viewpoint. You would think a debate board like the Straight Dope would be aware of this.

Oh, wait—they are! They even have rules stating it. They even have an Administrator/Mod named C K Dexter Haven who takes the time to remind people of this by offering in a post:

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules.

Maybe for your benefit he should add an addendum:

Just as a reminder and general statement: name-calling directed at other posters is NOT PERMITTED on the Straight Dope Message Boards, except in the forum called "The BBQ Pit." In all other forums, name-calling/personal insults are a direct violation of our rules. Even if the poster doing the name calling really, really, really believes that his name-calling fits super-duper perfectly.

This really isn't the type of stuff a mere poster should be explaining to a Mod. But I'm happy to be of service.

[Shodan]

If An Gadai thinks that you have racist viewpoints, do you think that he should be able to use the word "racist" to describe you? And if I think you have stupid viewpoints....

Regards,
Shodan

[matt_mcl]

You and your ilk would say things like that.

What is "ilk" anyway? :D

"that ilk" is Scots for "the same." Names of clans or sub-clans commonly include the name of a place (e.g. MacLachlan of Strathlachlan); where the place name is the same as the clan name, instead of duplicating (e.g. Moncreiffe of Moncreiffe), they would say Moncreiffe of that Ilk (i.e. "Moncreiffe of the same"). By extension, "that ilk" came to mean "that family" or "that group of people."

[TubaDiva]

Now see, you'll learn something new around here every day if you're not careful. :)

Thanks, Matt. I really didn't know and now I do.

[Darth Panda]

Yeah, that's one of the best pieces of trivia I've seen in a while.

[gonzomax]

It's like a moose.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

Moose or an ilk.