So, you’re saying that “criticizing the OP and the behavior of the original poster” is somehow “disrupting a thread” and “jerkish”?
I’m fascinated to see that you seem to feel you have some special inalienable right to have a meltdown with no criticism of your spewages.
**
“On-topic” meaning “It needs to agree with my posts”?
Please, I beg you. Go report me. See that little Report this post to a moderator hyperlink at the bottom of each post? I urge you to use it if you’re so convinced that you have some sort of special right to not be criticised when you vomit out your bile and we can let the mods settle this. I’ll happily abide by their wishes.
In any case, Ace, aren’t you the one who’s been whining that we’re all too easily offended and everyone but you and the trolls you’re defending are hypersensitive and how awful it is that we all have such terribly thin skin? And weren’t you saying that speaking the truth, no matter what, should be foremost regardless of the disruption or hurt that “the truth” causes?
That’s all I’m doing here, although I’m being fairly restrained. Surely my humble posts are well within the boundaries of the waltzing-into-a-thread about transgendered people and tossing out a crack like (in essence) “Hey, we were talking about you behind your back and you look like a dude” standard that you’re defending.
The clash is where we have two communities with different purposes and we attempt to force one standard upon them.
Would it surprise you that I am compassionate in a hospital? Loud at a bachelor party? There are merely aspects of singular personality, brought forth by the different purposes of those events – I don’t see from where the surprise comes, nope.
Ah, but you don’t have to, since we have a single standard – your hair is down all the time!
My interpretation of “Don’t be a Jerk” extends to habitual jerkishness. Which leads to putting yourself in a two-dimensional box of jerkdom.
Everyone is a jerk some of the time. I have made “jerky” posts. Scylla had made them (and always apologized). It happens. You have a bad day, or something just gets caught up your ass and irritates.
The problem is when the jerkyness is so overwhelming, it is all people know about you.
His4ever posts about nothing else but her view of the bible, and how homosexuality is sinful. She posts soooo much on homosexuality that I sometimes wondor if it may be latent in her.
Granted, to make an assumption like that is being a little jerky, but keep an eye out, because my next post will probably not be on this thread. Nor will it have anything to do with this topic.
This topic is consuming you. I perscribe rest from the BBQ Pit, Great Debates, and IMHO. Take some R&R in MPISM’S.
Wow, Ace, I didn’t know you cared. Just so you know we’re on the same page, I have no expectation of possibly being educated by you.
I’ve read your OP about six times, and I still can’t figure out what the fuck you are talking about. As far as I can tell, in the cause of the blazing white sword of Truth, you object to Board members objecting to comments where people are gratutiously being jerks.
As you know, the one basic rule of the Boards is “don’t be a jerk.” Yes, we are here to fight ignorance, but not to do it jerkishly. And part of the strength of these Boards is the right of any member who objects to the conduct of any other member to call them out in the Pit, but always at the risk of getting jumped on by the people responding to the Pit thread.
In this thread, you are exercising that right. However, to the extent that I can understand what the fuck you’re bitching about, I think your comments are, as usual, asinine.
Not at all. Feel free to criticize the OP and behavior related to the OP. I didn’t think you were doing that, is all.
No, I was saying we all need to follow the rules, and if the rules appear to be fluctuating or unclear they should be addressed so that we can ameliorate our behavior accordingly.
I think that’s a fair point that deserves a hearing, not buried by your Great Fenrisi noise.
Would that be the same one you’re supposed to use instead of calling anyone a troll, as above?
I’m not defending any particular existing community standard; I am once again, interested in hearing about the community standard. One possible standard is that the former post is noise and the second post contains information. Another possible standard is it all depends upon the offense taken. A third is that posters
IIRC, you previously agreed with my point that the insultee doesn’t get to wholly set the standards of insult in the Turd Burgular thread, correct? How should that standard be set?
I think that the mods are entirely too lenient on the don’t be a jerk rule. They like to ban people after they break a specific rule and that lets all the people who follow the rules to the letter of the law and break the spirit of it.
Like stormfront they just mess up the workings of the board and make everything focused on drama.
Sterra: and attempts (such as Ace’s here) to get the “letter of the law” clarified are invariably preludes to loophole surfing by these same people. All the more reason for the staff not to engage in that sort of nonsense. Don’t Be A Jerk is clear enough that it doesn’t need a thirty-five point explanation.
People in this thread and others have been trying to tell you what the community standard is. But you are only pretending to be interested in the community standard because it gives you an excuse to go on about how you want it to be changed to reflect the Truth According to Ace.
I think it’s clear, except for the ramifications of hurtful honesty in GD. All rules, especially those that appear to be shifting should be clear, not so that we can go “loophole-surfing” whatever that may be, but so we can steer well clear of any possible negative repercussions as the line slides towards us.
This sort of speculation is baiting at best – if someone messes around with the banning boundary it’s fairly obvious. If, on the other hand, one continues to stay in the same place, only to find that the banning zone is expanding A la Akira, it would have been nice to know, and eminently avoidable if the zone change had been made clear earlier.
And I note, that you didn’t answer my first question.
Ah. Mindreading, again? I point you to my responses and the debate which contains just that which you deny I am interested in. I could say “yes, I do” and what would it prove? The best way to demonstrate what I am or am not interested in is to engage the content of the thread, and watch me respond.
Having a single standard for two differently-purposed environments strikes me as both untrue – as implied by your “let my hair down” comment, and conflicting, as mentioned in Truth vs. Tact.
I’ve mentioned GD, since that is the forum where the conflict is the strongest, though as per my argument, it is certainly not the only one.
While I’m not about to waste a “report this post to a moderator” chit on it, please don’t break the law in my thread (especially since it was just mentioned in the last post to Fenris), I feel responsible for my guests, even if they’re charmingly geeky ones.
If you’re at a wedding, you don’t tell the bride that everyone thinks that dress makes her ass look big.
If you’re out with your drinking buddies, you don’t tell the father of a Down’s Syndrome child “Hey, th’ li’l gimpy dude only looks sorta like an orangutan tonight! Has he been taking his anti-ugly pills?”
And if you’re in GD (or IMHO or etc) you don’t tell a woman “Hey, we were gossiping about you and we agreed that you look like a dude. Just thought you’d wanna know.”.
Is ANYONE else here even remotely confused by this?
Here, let me offer you a script to follow if you really want to lay down the Law:
Dr. Gobear: What is the law?
Sayer of the Law: Not to be mean, that is the law. Are we not men?
Dopers (in unison): Are we not men?
Dr. Gobear: What is the law?
Sayer of the Law: Not to say deliberately hateful shit, that is the law. Are we not men?
Dopers (in unison): Are we not men?
Dr. Gobear: "What is the law?
Sayer of the Law: Not to spill blood, that is the law. Are we not men?
Dopers (in unison): Are we not men?
Even JerseyDiamond wasn’t confused by it. I mean after all when she first saw Eve she didn’t say it I am sure because she feared retaliation. I say instead of feared offending because when the threat of retaliation is gone she doesn’t seem to hold back.
Um…what “law” did he break? The term “flamebait” isn’t forbidden, IIRC. And he was just being honest. I thought you were in favor of Honesty Uber Alles.
Oh, and by the way: newsflash! It isn’t “your” thread.
Once you post it, you let it go out into the wilderness to fend for itself.
While it’s courteous to adhere to the OP’s wishes regading the broad thrust of thread direction, given your ongoing arguments against courtesy, I think we should respond to you in the standard you advocate.
:rolleyes: :smack: