I think you really need to define the difference between an “abusive” remark and an “insult.” I honestly have no idea what the distinction is.
One? There are a few Admin, current and former, who’ve been lobbying for a kinder, gentler Pit for years now.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit about who/why. (of course, I have no problem if you do, I’m just saying doesn’t matter to me) Much like I don’t care why the sandwhich shop changed from one particular mustard to another. I don’t like the change, and predictable results ensued.
I missed #5. So now we can’t call some idiot an idiot but we can say, “Nah, nah nanah nah I can’t hear you.” We can goad but not insult. Brilliant.
Loach
Future Guest
Besides the obvious points regarding the “no more fuck you” bull, I have an issue with this.
[my bolding]
Should as in we want you to, but if you choose not to OK? Can you be clearer please?
Hey, who’s writing the jokes here you handsome devil? 
I think this is one of the things that is causing the most confusion. Ed, could you clarify this? For example, let’s say I post a political opinion in the Pit someone strongly disagrees with – which, if any, of the following would be viewed as abusive under the new rule?
- Go to hell, Giraffe.
- Go to hell, Giraffe, you douchebag.
- Go to hell, Giraffe, you fat ugly loser.
- Go to hell, Giraffe, you dripping vagina face.
- Go to hell, Giraffe, you asshole.
- Go to hell, Giraffe, you diseased smegma-encrusted urethra.
I know it’s annoying to have to play semantics, but I really think it’s necessary to give people a clearer sense of behavior you are trying to eliminate.
Well it wouldn’t change the shitty results but it might change the direction of the discussion. If this came as a business decision pushed down from CL instead of a horrible idea at a lower level I would know who to talk about.
Loach
Future Guest
I guess my only question is, does anything anyone is saying here actually matter? Among the people who actually use the boards, these rules changes are being pretty much universally reviled. Do our reactions have any weight here, or should we all just go pound sand?
I would like this clarified as well, please. How do these stack up?
[ul]
[li]Telling someone they are insane or living in a dreamworld [/li][li]Telling them they have a martyr complex[/li][li]Calling someone a liar [/li][li]Asking if they forgot their meds this morning[/li][/ul]
Those are pretty insulting, but do they count as abusive?
[For the record, I typically do not insult or abuse, whether in the Pit or elsewhere, but I just want to know so I don’t get banned if I do get angry enough to insult.]
They all would be, because you can’t imply that you want someone to die.
I do hope **Ed **rethinks rule 2. Some of the most memorable, creative and entertaining pittings we have had on this board have been liberally peppered with Anglo-Saxon epithets. And, yes, those pittings would have been far the poorer without them. I’m sure we can all think of wonderful examples. It saddens me to think that those posts would be unacceptable now.
That’d be Ed, you gorgeous creature! 
I don’t think “go to hell” counts as a death wish, but if it does hopefully Ed can still comment on the list and ignore that part.
I’m curious to see how often Ed responds in this thread. Until I see otherwise I’ll assume this will just be a “Let them post until they get tired of complaining” thread.
On the question of no abusive remarks at other posters:
Well, we knew there’d be over-reaction. Look, we’re not saying you can’t insult other posters. We’re saying that there’s a line (however fuzzy.) “You’re a jerk” is acceptable; “Fuck yourself” is not. “You’re stupid” is fine; “You’re a cunt” is not. It’s a question of insult vs abuse. There is a difference, and it’s usually pretty clear. We’re not cutting out insults, we’re cutting out viciousness and abusiveness.
Are we going to define it? Sure, if someone would like to draft up the 700-page document… which would still not be fine enough. We’ve got along pretty well with “don’t be a jerk” without having to define “jerk,” we don’t see why we can’t get along on “don’t be abusive” without having to define it. It will depend on context, at a minimum.
We’ve always had limits on insults in terms of racism, sexism, etc. “You ass” is OK, “You nigger” is not. No one (well, only a couple of people) have any problems with this. The internal discussion amongst the mods has always been, it’s OK to duke it out, but there are Marquess of Queensbury rules.
Those things don’t happen often. The Pit will still be very much the Pit. We’re limiting what has, in the past, been a very small percentage of posts. And, please note, we’re very carefully saying that we’re not about to take serious immediate action on these. The bannable offense is repeatedly failing to listen to moderators.
On complaints about moderator action:
We think it makes sense that if you have a complaint about a moderator’s action, you express it nicely rather than abusively or viciously. Basically, the mods are tired of putting up with abuse every time they take any actions. Criticism is one thing; abuse is something else.
My only comment on these rules, Ed, is that you cannot seriously expect to differentiate between “abusive” and “insult.” One man’s insult is another man’s abuse. Differences may well exist in interpretation of this among the Pit moderators, as well as among the Admins. That does not bode well.
I’d suggest re-thinking the wording of this. Try and be more precise about what it is you mean.
ETA: Dex, despite your bland assertion that there is an obvious difference between the two, I can assure you there is not. And as you know, it’s not like I’m a fan of The Pit, or someone who flames for fun here.
What is the difference here?
Is “you’re an idiot” fine? What about “you’re a moron”? “You’re a mouth-breathing cretin”?
How about “you’re a jerk”?
On a board where “FOAD” results in a banning after a protracted argument over whether or not it’s a death threat, I wouldn’t risk it myself, but I do get your point.
I don’t think it’s as clear as you think. Some people would find the phrase “ugly worthless fatass” vicious and abusive, others wouldn’t.
Could you go through my list of examples and tell me which ones fall where?