Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:12 PM
John DiFool John DiFool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 18,089
"Respect and civility for all."

I've about had it. Note the much-rumored but probably nonexistent forum for Pitting Moderators isn't open for business at the moment (checks again...durn it), so this goes here.

Ok. Fine. So the new watchwords are "respect" and "civility."

How many fucking times have we seen this play out? An alt-righter says something provocative/stupid/trolling/broken recordish, someone else calls them out on it, yet it is only the latter who get the notes and warnings?

Now. How TF is long-term trolling showing any sort of "respect and civility for all"? Because that's what we have here. A cadre of mindless Trumpian bozos who continue to trot out their moronic, false, and endlessly repetitive horseshit.

But this thread isn't about them. It's about their enablers in the mod loop.

In case TPTB here have yet to figure it out, WE ARE NOW AT WAR WITH A HOSTILE NATION. One which PAYS mindless assholes like the ones infesting this site to troll message boards with their disruptive dogcrap, over and over and over and over and over, for the sole purpose of destablizing our nation and our society. And hey they have almost pulled it off. Partially because people have coddled their worthless asses, both here and elsewhere, for far too long.

Our mods here will constantly overlook the giant shit one of them just left on the sidewalk, and will instead throw the full weight of the book at the gumchewers who toss a small sticky one out there. All because they managed to somehow evade the precise "letter" of the rules.

I've almost left this board several times over this crap in the past year, after witnessing endless trolling like in the above thread that only rarely gets any actual substantive action. Fuck, we only recently saw one long-term troll, who openly admitted same, hang around far far past his sell-by date before the banhammer finally fell on his worthless ass. Well, what in the fuck were you waiting for?!?

I am one more incident like the above away from buggering off for good. You really need to dump the entire lot out the back door, and not get into this "Welp, I cannot mind-read the bastard to see if he is truly sincere or not, so I guess he stays." This curious notion that we have to direct a mind-scanning ray at someone to divine their true mindset before they finally get shit-canned is utterly preposterous. BY DEFINITION these kinds of people are NOT the least bit interested in your quaint notions of "respect" and "civility", no matter how often they may evade your little dragnet (with its gaping holes).

Either they go, or I (and a lot of other Dopers, many of which are already splitsville) go. Simple as that.
  #2  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:21 PM
Roderick Femm Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 6,223
What exactly is your alternative? If someone expresses views that you find abhorrent but does so politely, you want the option to let them have the full weight of your displeasure, including name calling and swearing and whatever else you have at your disposal, without any repercussions to you. Is that it?

It appears that you want the mods to take sides in debates, and to make rulings not on the basis of civil discourse but on the basis of content. Is that correct?

I just want to be sure if that is what you really want.
  #3  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:23 PM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 36,866
I am told there is a forum hereabouts where "respect and civility" aren't required. Just saying.

Regards,
Shodan
  #4  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:51 PM
Tamerlane Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
An alt-righter says something provocative/stupid/trolling/broken recordish, someone else calls them out on it, yet it is only the latter who get the notes and warnings?
This is what you are calling "provocative/stupid/trolling/broken recordish"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Meh, I voted for Cruz in the primary. I would have preferred him to Trump, but overall I'd say that President Trump "is doing a good job."
I think Trump is a hot garbage fire( and I'm particularly pissed off over his latest pardon )and almost certainly will go down as the worst president in US history, but there is nothing offensive in the above quote. Like, zero. It's just a political opinion. A horribly wrong political opinion IMHO, but nothing more.

You need to develop a thicker skin.

Last edited by Tamerlane; 07-11-2018 at 12:52 PM.
  #5  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:56 PM
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 29,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
I am told there is a forum hereabouts where "respect and civility" aren't required. Just saying.

Regards,
Shodan
If you mean The Barn House, I don't think it is currently open for business.
  #6  
Old 07-11-2018, 01:02 PM
cochrane cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 20,579
First, it was just a mod note. Yeah, I know. Some posters here treat mod notes as some kind of vile and horrid punishment.

It seems to me the note was triggered by fiveyearlurker's "mindless idiots" comment, so yeah, I can see the rationale behind the note.
  #7  
Old 07-11-2018, 01:03 PM
Colibri Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 39,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Either they go, or I (and a lot of other Dopers, many of which are already splitsville) go. Simple as that.
Just to summarize, you want us to summarily ban anyone who expresses any support for Trump (or perhaps for any Republican, or for any conservative position)? Is that it?
  #8  
Old 07-11-2018, 01:24 PM
Crazy Canuck Crazy Canuck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Either they go, or I (and a lot of other Dopers, many of which are already splitsville) go. Simple as that.
Bye Felicia.
  #9  
Old 07-11-2018, 01:45 PM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 83,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
I am one more incident like the above away from buggering off for good. You really need to dump the entire lot out the back door, and not get into this "Welp, I cannot mind-read the bastard to see if he is truly sincere or not, so I guess he stays." This curious notion that we have to direct a mind-scanning ray at someone to divine their true mindset before they finally get shit-canned is utterly preposterous. BY DEFINITION these kinds of people are NOT the least bit interested in your quaint notions of "respect" and "civility", no matter how often they may evade your little dragnet (with its gaping holes).

Either they go, or I (and a lot of other Dopers, many of which are already splitsville) go. Simple as that.
Been nice knowing you. I'd say "don't forge to write", but that might not be possible.
  #10  
Old 07-11-2018, 01:58 PM
John DiFool John DiFool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 18,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
Just to summarize, you want us to summarily ban anyone who expresses any support for Trump (or perhaps for any Republican, or for any conservative position)? Is that it?
Trolling by definition is NOT being the things in the title. You can dress a pig up in lipstick and a dress, doesn't make it a fashion model by any stretch. A mod who calls for such things in the middle of such a discussion, given the long-term practices here of rationalizing and encouraging trollery is sure to have the [person in question] laughing his ass off at the mod. I simply found it to be an unbelievably naive' statement, requiring one to so narrowly define said terms (in this context) that they thus have become utterly meaningless here.

My call here is for more aggressive moderation against disingenuous incivil "debating" tactics (if you want to call them that). We have a rule against trolling. I suggest we actually use it more than once in a blue moon. And I'll note you yourself calling such posters out* in the Troll Pit thread. Yet you casually stroll out of the Pit to your home forum, and all of a sudden your "troll" is now suddenly immune from moderation.

[*In #2 it took you more than a year to finally pull the trigger. In the last one you-all did ban the fucker pretty quickly, but I love your quote here: "Different Trump-troll. There's no shortage of them."]

Now of course I'll be tossed onto the slippery slope of "How do you define a troll, exactly?" and yadda yadda yadda. Note however that we have precedents, it's just that they aren't consistently followed.

If this is the board that you want to have, where such behavior is constantly enabled, then there is nothing more that I can say. Let the board die, if that is what you really want (it's already happening anyway). In which case I am out of here.

Last edited by John DiFool; 07-11-2018 at 01:59 PM.
  #11  
Old 07-11-2018, 02:09 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 38,616
Meh. I'm with Tamerlane.

Like it or not (spoiler: I don't like it), Trump supporters make up well more than a third of our country. As distasteful as Hurricane's frequent gloating may be, it's helpful for me to see how Trump supporters are thinking.

The ones that cross the line? Ban 'em. I don't see Hurricane crossing the line.
  #12  
Old 07-11-2018, 02:51 PM
choie choie is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Like me it never sleeps.
Posts: 4,652
Good grief, John DiFool. I have as much distaste for Trump as anyone. But I cannot believe, with all the offensive bilge being flung by various one-note, race-baiting newly arrived posters who fairly stink of borscht and vodka*, you choose HD's flaccid Trump support as your Rubicon.


* I know it doesn't stink. Shut up, t'was a rhetorical device.
  #13  
Old 07-11-2018, 03:05 PM
Telemark Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Again, Titletown
Posts: 21,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Meh. I'm with Tamerlane.
Me too. If you can't engage civilly with people who's ideas you dislike, then you can't really contribute here.
  #14  
Old 07-11-2018, 03:07 PM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Trolling by definition is NOT being the things in the title.
I assume by "the things in the title" you meant "respect and civility". Correct me if I am wrong.
Quote:
You can dress a pig up in lipstick and a dress, doesn't make it a fashion model by any stretch. A mod who calls for such things in the middle of such a discussion, given the long-term practices here of rationalizing and encouraging trollery is sure to have the [person in question] laughing his ass off at the mod. I simply found it to be an unbelievably naive' statement, requiring one to so narrowly define said terms (in this context) that they thus have become utterly meaningless here.

My call here is for more aggressive moderation against disingenuous incivil "debating" tactics (if you want to call them that). We have a rule against trolling. I suggest we actually use it more than once in a blue moon.
Also to be clear - is this
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka
Meh, I voted for Cruz in the primary. I would have preferred him to Trump, but overall I'd say that President Trump "is doing a good job."
the post that you think is disrespectful or uncivil? Because I am not seeing it.

Unless, as Colibri says, you believe that saying that President Trump is doing a good job is inherently trollery. I don't see that either.

Regards,
Shodan
  #15  
Old 07-11-2018, 03:21 PM
cochrane cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 20,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane View Post
This is what you are calling "provocative/stupid/trolling/broken recordish"?



I think Trump is a hot garbage fire( and I'm particularly pissed off over his latest pardon )and almost certainly will go down as the worst president in US history, but there is nothing offensive in the above quote. Like, zero. It's just a political opinion. A horribly wrong political opinion IMHO, but nothing more.

You need to develop a thicker skin.
OK, yeah, going back to HD's post re: "Trump is doing a good job," it's his opinion, and he's allowed to say it, just as I or anyone else are free to disagree with it. John DiFool, I can't seriously believe a comment like that would drive you off this message board. It's a serious overreaction on your part.
  #16  
Old 07-11-2018, 03:23 PM
Colibri Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 39,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
If this is the board that you want to have, where such behavior is constantly enabled, then there is nothing more that I can say. Let the board die, if that is what you really want (it's already happening anyway). In which case I am out of here.
So, just to be clear, you regard stating any support for Trump to be trolling, and anyone doing so should be banned? Because that was the position you appeared to be taking in the OP, with respect to the example you chose.

Yes or no?
  #17  
Old 07-11-2018, 03:36 PM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 83,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
So, just to be clear, you regard stating any support for Trump to be trolling, and anyone doing so should be banned? Because that was the position you appeared to be taking in the OP, with respect to the example you chose.

Yes or no?
Just to add to this, it would help if the OP clarified what, exactly, he thinks is "trolling" in the post he was so offended by. Please quote the post, point out the trolling statement(s) and tell us why you think it is trolling. Just screaming "troll" is not getting you anywhere, in case you haven't noticed.

The person in question might indeed but a troll. But no one else is seeing it in the post you seem to be talking about.
  #18  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:01 PM
DSYoungEsq DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 13,337
There are some days when you need to just step away from the keyboard, and go play a round of golf. I think someone is having one of those today.
  #19  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:08 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6,774
You think threats to get a policy change where the board becomes even more homogeneous in thought are a good idea or would set a good precedent?

And you honestly think that people are paid by those sneaky Russians to post here?
  #20  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:35 PM
aldiboronti aldiboronti is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Troynovant
Posts: 8,108
Clearly the sooner this 'hostile nation' is forced to think only correct thoughts the better. I suggest re-education camps although perhaps they should be styled 'sensitivity training' classes, it sounds less Orwellian.
  #21  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:05 PM
bobot bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 6,122
I know that threatening to quit isn't going to get you any sympathy. Yeah the Russian troll bots and actual American Trump supporters can be frustrating. But you can handle those guys! Dust yourself off and get back in there, Buddy!
  #22  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:10 PM
burpo the wonder mutt burpo the wonder mutt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NE Florida
Posts: 21,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
You think threats to get a policy change where the board becomes even more homogeneous in thought are a good idea or would set a good precedent?

And you honestly think that people are paid by those sneaky Russians to post here?
Oh, borscht! My last Czech bounced!
  #23  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:33 PM
What Exit? What Exit? is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 28,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
So, just to be clear, you regard stating any support for Trump to be trolling, and anyone doing so should be banned? Because that was the position you appeared to be taking in the OP, with respect to the example you chose.

Yes or no?
Maybe it was the Cruz part, in theory only a troll would vote for that man. Fellow Republicans consider him absolutely toxic. Trump was just a weird side-show by comparison. Now looks far more dangerous, but Cruz ::shudder::
  #24  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:37 PM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 83,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
There are some days when you need to just step away from the keyboard, and go play a round of golf. I think someone is having one of those today.
As much as I love a relaxing round of golf, I'm not sure this guy would benefit from its therapeutic properties.
  #25  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:55 PM
Bone Bone is online now
extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,123
I've isolated what I think are your main points:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Our mods here will constantly overlook the giant shit one of them just left on the sidewalk, and will instead throw the full weight of the book at the gumchewers who toss a small sticky one out there. All because they managed to somehow evade the precise "letter" of the rules.
This is a feature, rather than a bug. If a person stays within the rules, then ipso facto we as moderators will not penalize that person. That's how rules are supposed to work. It's perfectly acceptable to have opposing views, encouraged in fact in GD. It's is the nature of the forum that people will weigh in on contentious topics and in doing so discussion can be passionate. The rules serve as a way to curtail some of our base urges in an effort to foster an environment where discussion can take place.

The alternative is a sort of moderation that doesn't rely on actual known and written rules. Instead, moderation would be based on some unknown rule set that could change day to day. That doesn't foster discussion. In short, if a poster stays within the rules, they will not be penalized. If a poster does not stay within the rules, then they will potentially be penalized.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Trolling by definition is NOT being the things in the title. You can dress a pig up in lipstick and a dress, doesn't make it a fashion model by any stretch. A mod who calls for such things in the middle of such a discussion, given the long-term practices here of rationalizing and encouraging trollery is sure to have the [person in question] laughing his ass off at the mod. I simply found it to be an unbelievably naive' statement, requiring one to so narrowly define said terms (in this context) that they thus have become utterly meaningless here.

My call here is for more aggressive moderation against disingenuous incivil "debating" tactics (if you want to call them that). We have a rule against trolling. I suggest we actually use it more than once in a blue moon. ...
Your call appears to be more instances of moderating for trolling, is that correct? If you were a moderator how would you write the hypothetical warning? 'XYZ, you are receiving a warning for trolling because....' then what? Perhaps you can craft the rule that can be applied generally and we can evaluate whether such a rule would be wise to adopt.

As an FYI, as far as using the warning more than once in a blue moon - warnings for trolling are the 4th most issued warning on the boards, though by a distant margin.
  #26  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:57 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 38,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
As an FYI, as far as using the warning more than once in a blue moon - warnings for trolling are the 4th most issued warning on the boards, though by a distant margin.
You got me curious.
  #27  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:14 PM
Colibri Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 39,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
You got me curious.
Personal insults are #1.
  #28  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:14 PM
Der Trihs Der Trihs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 38,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
Ok. Fine. So the new watchwords are "respect" and "civility."

How many fucking times have we seen this play out? An alt-righter says something provocative/stupid/trolling/broken recordish, someone else calls them out on it, yet it is only the latter who get the notes and warnings?
That's how it works on every forum I'm familiar with, including supposedly left wing ones. The rightists get treated with kid gloves and openly ignore the rules, while anyone who tries arguing with them gets hit with heavy penalties. It's been true here for as long as I recall, resulting in a long-standing population of "race realists" and the like.
  #29  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:21 PM
Procrustus Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 10,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post

And you honestly think that people are paid by those sneaky Russians to post here?
If you have a more compelling explanation for why someone would [claim to] support Trump, I'll all ears.
  #30  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:34 PM
DSeid DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
... Either they go, or I (and a lot of other Dopers, many of which are already splitsville) go. Simple as that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post

... If this is the board that you want to have, where such behavior is constantly enabled, then there is nothing more that I can say. Let the board die, if that is what you really want (it's already happening anyway). In which case I am out of here.
By now you may be getting the idea ... yes, this (the bit you are talking about) IS the board a great many of us want to have.

What I personally do NOT want is another place to be surrounded completely by those who think like I do and who do not challenge my positions or give me an opportunity to challenge theirs. I know what I think and why already.

Those with opinions very divergent to mine have in fact succeeded in getting me to change my positions on many subjects. I hope that sometimes it has gone the other way as well. And in any case making and reading the arguments has increased my ability to make the case that I believe in by better understanding how those with other thoughts have come to their positions.

I care less about you leaving than I care about one of those with positions very divergent to mine (who engages with some mutual respect or at least within the rules) leaving. Diversity of thought is desired and we got enough who think as you do on political matters.

If that is not what you want, if what you want is a place to go to commiserate with those who share your opinions without any dissent, then well, at least stay in MPSIMS, and out of Elections, GD, IMHO, the Pit, and probably Cafe Society. GQ should be okay too I guess. What is Marketplace like?
  #31  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:39 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
If you have a more compelling explanation for why someone would [claim to] support Trump, I'll all ears.
~63 million people voted for the man. I donít think they are all on the Kremlin payroll.
  #32  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:41 PM
What Exit? What Exit? is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 28,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
If you have a more compelling explanation for why someone would [claim to] support Trump, I'll all ears.
Many do support Trump though I don't know why. My own in-laws, voted for him though since the election, they're regretting it. Hard to get, but many saw him as the lesser of 2 evils vs. Hillary.



Me, I held my nose less hard to vote for Hillary than the time I had to vote for Kerry/Edwards. That was tough. God, I actually enjoyed voting for Obama, can we please get some more candidates like him?
  #33  
Old 07-11-2018, 07:34 PM
engineer_comp_geek engineer_comp_geek is online now
Robot Mod in Beta Testing
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 21,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
What is Marketplace like?
Items of a political nature are listed there on occasion.
  #34  
Old 07-11-2018, 07:37 PM
JRDelirious JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 15,180
Well, sure, it can look like our moderation/rules regime often comes down upon those of us who "should know better than that", and allows for skirting just on the right side of the Letter of the Law. I am sure there will be cases where one side will feel they are being told to take the high road while the other guy is going "nyah, nyah, I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you!"


ISTM however this particular example was a confusingly light straw to break the camel's back. Paraphrasing:

H: "Oh, I'm OK with Trump"
F: "Come on, you know he thinks you are a mindless idiot"
Mod: "You know better, don't make it personal, keep it civil"

Looking at that, the way note alludes to personalizing the debate, lends itself to the interpretation that the problem was in the "you" usage in the course of interpreting the Combed Over One's verbal effluvia that raised red flags. Which for all I know could have been a "generic you". I am willing to be corrected if wrong but does that mean if the response had been impersonalized instead as in: "When Trump said he could shoot a man on Fifth Avenue and not lose votes, he didn't mean that as a complement. He was calling his base unthinking fools who would follow him regardless of his actions", it might have remained within the bounds?

Last edited by JRDelirious; 07-11-2018 at 07:39 PM.
  #35  
Old 07-11-2018, 10:06 PM
Jonathan Chance Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 21,276
I'd honestly have to say a qualified 'yes' to that.

Personalizing arguments in Great Debates - and to a lesser extent Elections - is generally poor form. It takes things from an effort to find answers and Debate to accusations and insults and is nothing near best practices.
  #36  
Old 07-11-2018, 11:03 PM
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 34,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I'd honestly have to say a qualified 'yes' to that.

Personalizing arguments in Great Debates - and to a lesser extent Elections - is generally poor form. It takes things from an effort to find answers and Debate to accusations and insults and is nothing near best practices.
Even assuming it is poor form, I don't see why that matters. The mods here don't enforce best practices. I've never seen a mod come in and say "You should know better! In GQ, you should ask a question in a clear and precise manner with enough details to understand the question, but not enough to cause a distraction." I don't see people in this thread being told "You know better. It is poor form to further antagonize the poster who is clearly angry. It only makes them angrier."

I admit that the actual post is a bit harsher than the paraphrase, but I can't see at all how it's some clear line that a poster should have known not to cross. There is no rule against "personalizing" a comment, and saying that "what he really meant was that he hates you" is not an uncommon thing I've read in very civil conversations.

In fact, that's what I thought this thread would be about. All of these "You should know better" comments come off as belittling to me, like you think we're assholes who are deliberately violating the rules. But the reality is that it's not always clear where the line is. I doubt FYL thought he was even being uncivil.

And, even if you think it is clear, does it help? What does it accomplish? I've seen plenty of people get upset by it, but has the lack of such a statement resulted in people not following moderator directions?

It just seems, well, poor form, and not best practice. I've never seen it anywhere else online.

Last edited by BigT; 07-11-2018 at 11:04 PM.
  #37  
Old 07-12-2018, 12:37 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I doubt FYL thought he was even being uncivil.
Was he Modded for being uncivil?

Or was he Modded for expressing an opinion as a direct, personal challenge with a high probability of starting a fight.

You would be correct that we do not have a rule against speaking to another poster. However, Mod notes instructing posters to back off and to not make a discussion into a personal feud are as old as the board, itself. (Without even getting into the whole issue of insults in the second person that are not strictly clear whether the "you" is personal or rhetorical.)
  #38  
Old 07-12-2018, 07:52 AM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 55,880
My own thought it was not clear whether the pronoun "you," was used in its definite or indefinite sense.

(1) Trump thinks you [the general class of voters supporting him] are useful idiots.
(2) Trump thinks you [personally, the poster here] is a useful idiot.

In other words, I think JRDelirious is right on the money.

That said, there have been SDMB posters in the past who seem to equate disagreeable opinions with trolling. "No one could possibly genuinely hold that opinion," the thinking seems to go in these cases, "so they must be trolling for a reaction."
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.

Last edited by Bricker; 07-12-2018 at 07:54 AM.
  #39  
Old 07-12-2018, 07:55 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 38,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
Personal insults are #1.
Figured that--but what are #2 and #3? Failure to follow mod directions is probably one of them, but what's the other?

Last edited by Left Hand of Dorkness; 07-12-2018 at 07:56 AM.
  #40  
Old 07-12-2018, 08:17 AM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 83,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Figured that--but what are #2 and #3? Failure to follow mod directions is probably one of them, but what's the other?
#2 is asking too many questions.
  #41  
Old 07-12-2018, 08:40 AM
Jonathan Chance Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 21,276
One of our dorkier moderators put together this list once. It was only good through February of this year and only contains data since - I believe - 2009.

1. Personal Insults
2. Failure to Follow Moderator Instructions
3. Being a Jerk
4. Trolling

Now, I'm not going to name names. I just want to point out that I, a grown-ass man who has attended Ren Faires in costume since the 80s, has attended Star Trek cons when that was mostly what there was, has collected comics for so many years that he had to devote a room in his home to storing them, has his home's wall art consist of geek things and original comic artwork and has a chalkboard wall in his home loft so he can do math on the fly...

Me, with all of that, pointed at this mod and yelled, 'NERD'!
  #42  
Old 07-12-2018, 08:55 AM
Loach Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 24,068
If we can purge all those with different political views we can get down to debating the important issues like the designated hitter rule.
  #43  
Old 07-12-2018, 09:07 AM
watchwolf49 watchwolf49 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 8,367
Men on first and second, one out ... pop fly in foul territory off the third base line ... fielder lets the ball drop to the ground ... can the runner on second "tag-up" and advance to third base? ...

ETA: Just curious ... what rank is "warning on a whim"? ...

Last edited by watchwolf49; 07-12-2018 at 09:09 AM.
  #44  
Old 07-12-2018, 10:13 AM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 55,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
If we can purge all those with different political views we can get down to debating the important issues like the designated hitter rule.
An abomination against the purity and decency of baseball. Learn to strategize the use of your pitcher in the batting order, dammit.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #45  
Old 07-12-2018, 10:23 AM
Bone Bone is online now
extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
If we can purge all those with different political views we can get down to debating the important issues like the designated hitter rule.
That's football right?
  #46  
Old 07-12-2018, 10:26 AM
What Exit? What Exit? is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 28,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
An abomination against the purity and decency of baseball. Learn to strategize the use of your pitcher in the batting order, dammit.
Only one league left in the world clings to the now outdated notion of pitchers hitting. Sorry, but it is time for universal DH. Not that I get upset by this issue, I would be fine with ending the DH but increasing roster sizes by 1 or 2 with a limit on the number of pitchers you can carry.
  #47  
Old 07-12-2018, 10:33 AM
Goodnight-Loving Goodnight-Loving is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Ye Olde Smithy
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by watchwolf49 View Post
Men on first and second, one out ... pop fly in foul territory off the third base line ... fielder lets the ball drop to the ground ... can the runner on second "tag-up" and advance to third base? ....
Dead ball.
  #48  
Old 07-12-2018, 01:33 PM
Roderick Femm Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 6,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
(snip)

That said, there have been SDMB posters in the past who seem to equate disagreeable opinions with trolling. "No one could possibly genuinely hold that opinion," the thinking seems to go in these cases, "so they must be trolling for a reaction."
In the past? This seems to be a very vibrant and living movement in the present, among others, with those who believe that no-one could legitimately and honestly support 45. I loathe this presidency, and yet I find this attitude tiresome and unhelpful. Go figure. Anyway, when I stop seeing disagreeable opinions here, that's when I'll be leaving.
  #49  
Old 07-12-2018, 01:49 PM
cochrane cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 20,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by watchwolf49 View Post
Men on first and second, one out ... pop fly in foul territory off the third base line ... fielder lets the ball drop to the ground ... can the runner on second "tag-up" and advance to third base? ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight-Loving View Post
Dead ball.
Who's on first?
  #50  
Old 07-12-2018, 02:58 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 55,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by What Exit? View Post
Only one league left in the world clings to the now outdated notion of pitchers hitting. Sorry, but it is time for universal DH. Not that I get upset by this issue, I would be fine with ending the DH but increasing roster sizes by 1 or 2 with a limit on the number of pitchers you can carry.
Why not a full roster for offense and defensive players, then? We can have nine "designated hitters," and a bunch of highly specialized outfielders and infielders that never hit.

My answer is: because that ruins the trade-off choices that make baseball so intriguing to manage and are (or should be) an essential element of the game.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017