You’ll also notice that the FAQ points out how the “no insults” rule varies by forum; this applies to direct insults and group insults. Dinsdale’s insult, because it was aimed at a group of people who were particpating in the thread, wouldn’t have been acceptable in MPSIMS, either.
I’d like to add that the original thread could have been posted in GQ if that OP had wanted to avoid offensive or hostile opinions. Had she done so, Dinsdale would have been a threadshitter because he didn’t give a factual answer. Instead, that poster chose to open her thread in In My Humble Opinion and to ask for opinions.
It is simply false, therefore, to say that his post was
It had precisely the content asked for.
Sorry, SkipMagic, we cross-posted.
I understand your point, and I agree that Dinsdale would probably have been out of line (IMO) in MPSIMS. But as I explained in the cross-post, I think what he did is very much appropriate for IMHO. He gave an opinion. It was an insulting opinion, but it wasn’t unsolicited and it wasn’t needlessly insulting. (He didn’t sugarcoat it, but he didn’t seem to be going out of his way to make his post any more insulting than the simple expression of his opinion that certain people are foolish.)
I think that chastising someone for expressing an insulting (but asked for) opinion in IMHO is a mistake. Just as the Pit is the place for direct insults, IMHO opinion should be the place for frank opinions even if they happen to insult people incidentally. It’s a judgment call, so I don’t think Czarcasm needs to rend his clothes or heap ashes on his head (See what I did there?), but I do think he made a mistake and that something can be learned from it.
Asked for by whom? Certainly not by the OP of the thread, who specifically addressed her question to “non-Catholic Christian[s].”
And the request was for opinions about Ash Wednesday, not for commentary on its participants. That it was insulting commentary punted it right across the line.
Eh, I think the OP waffled on what she wanted. The title addressed “non-Catholics”. I took the phrasing in the post itself to be elaborative, not restrictive. She could have specified, “practicing Christians only, please,” or posted in GQ if she’d wanted to.
Again, it’s a judgment call, and I can see both sides. I just disagree with your side, is all. I could maybe see a casual non-official warning, but I don’t think opinions that can reasonably be construed as a response to the OP should be discouraged in IMHO, even if they insult people (indirectly).
Maybe we should change the name of the forum from In My Humble Opinion to just In My Opinion.
Dinsdale, why would you call anyone here an idiot? Even if we were to be completely mistaken in this area of our lives, would that make us “idiots”? Could we not continue to function as intelligent members of the community? Have you been treated with disrespect by the Christians who post here regularly? Do you not see any contributions that we make to society? What about music and art? What about the monk who is known as “the father of genetics”?
Why do you use the old “sticks and stones” reminder against us with the assurance that words don’t hurt – and yet resort to calling others names when their words have hurt you?
Thanks for asking. You are correct. The only respect in which I regret my “idiot” post was because I now realize (and should have before) that I caused some amount of pain and distress to a few posters out there whom I would rather have not unnecessarily offended. Of course, there are a number of posters out there whom I couldn’t care less whether or not I offended them - and I’m sure they return the favor.
I didn’t think my initial post contained enough to cause the offense received. Heck, what exactly was I calling idiocy? All deism? Christian belief? Catholicism? The receipt of ashes? Keeping them on your forehead? External demonstrations of one’s religious beliefs? Any particular SDMB member(s)?
Would it have made a difference whether I said the paractitioners “were” idiots as opposed to “looking like” idiots? And instead of “idiot” perhaps I could have stated “individuals who choose to abdicate rational thought in at least this one aspect of their lives.” Would that have been any more or less offensive or accurate?
I still don’t think my initial comment was necessarily out of line, or warranted anything more than an informal warning or request for clarification. But several mods have stated otherwise, and I’m perfectly happy in accepting their rule as law.
I guess I never really realized before that the readiness of a particular group to cry “foul” played such a significant role in rule interpretation and enforcement around here. I have some very strong personal beliefs, but I can’t recall complaining to moderators when I saw a post challenging or even insulting such beliefs. I had thought that the communication around here was free enough and the participants had tough enough skins, that they didn’t necessarily run crying to mommy when their particular sacred ox got gored. But again, I’m fine with realizing now that that’s how things go.
I, too, was raised Catholic. Quite a few years ago, I realized that I just didn’t accept the Supreme Being concept. However, my past hasn’t bent me out of shape. Yes, it’s a good idea to keep a watch on certain religious nuts. (Here in the Bible Belt those particular nuts are generally Not Catholic.)
But–what’s the point of threadshitting rudeness? Perhaps you need to work some things out on a personal level.
(If you ever feel insulted by an SDMB post–do consider Alerting the Moderators.)
On many more than one occasion IRL folks have called me rude/tactless/disrespectful/etc. Nothing I’m particularly proud of, just suggesting that I was not adopting an act for purposes of that thread - or these forums. And at 47, I think it unlikely that I’m going to drastically restyle my personality/behavior.
IMO there’s a fine line between open plain-speaking, and rudeness. And I’m not convinced that religious folks merit any particular “respect” for their chosen irrational belief. One person’s christianity is exactly as irrational as another’s Scientology. As a non-believer, ISTM that christians enjoy favored status in many aspects of our society. Undoubtedly that contributes to my failing to be as polite as possible when posting semi-anonymously on-line. While we SDMBers are engaged in a cooperative activity, you guys aren’t as close to me as friends and family whom I would be more careful to avoid insulting.
Nah - my personal opinion is that the boards operate better, and the exchange of info is improved if people anticipate and accept potential criticism or even insults. If I wanted to be free of that, I could hang out in some Humanists’ forums.
You were being a dick and you got called on it, and now you’re rationalizing. It must be that “rule interpretation and enforcement” is significantly impacted by “the readiness of a particular group to cry ‘foul’.” It must be that people are just too, too thin-skinned, and have to “run crying to mommy” when they are offended. Oh, and perhaps if you had modified the insult you could have gotten away with it? So therefore it must not have been all that insulting in the first place.
Rationalizing from first to last, when the simple reality is just that you were being a dick and you got called on it. If you’re fine with the mods rule being law in this matter, then fucking suck it up, quit whining, and move on.
And I’m significantly nicer to people who know me IRL as well. I just don’t think that’s relevant to the times when I’m a dick around here.
Hmm. I wasn’t aware that I was particularly “whining.” I think I acknowledged pretty early on that I knew people would be offended and I wasn’t seeking any sympathy.
And I’m not sure what you mean by “rationalizing.” In your book is that the same as explaining or elaborating? In my mind, I simply did not know that a dickish comment of the type I made necessarily warranted a warning. I now know better - at least if someone complains.
I would be interested in how many of what type of comments posters complain of. Do “gun nuts,” atheists, and mormons complain to the mods as often as (non-LDS) christians? I don’t know.
If the definitions of “whiny” and “rationalizing” give you trouble, consult a dictionary. You may not agree with my analysis of you behavior – big surprise! – but my opinion stands and is fully as justified as your own. You were a dick before and you’re being a whiny dick now. But hey, you’re 47, far too old to change, so just own your dickishness for what it is instead of analyzing it into goddamn atoms. Shit-fire, this isn’t hard. You said it; you don’t regret it; you got your hand slapped. Fucking suck it up.
Actually, if you scan back through this thread, you might agree that I had ceased my “whining” some time back until Zoe’s post reminded me what you had observed earlier - (I’m not the brightest bulb around) - that my original post had potentially offended at least 1 or 2 SDMBers I would have preferred not to offend. The only reason I posted today was to offer a somewhat half-hearted apology to those few folks - including you. Didn’t realize I was being a whiny dick in doing so. 
Analyzing it to the atoms? Hmm. I thought (and still think) that I had a legitimate question as to how the board was moderated and warnings meted out. Some folk in this thread agreed with me that it was unclear. Are you criticizing me for trying to identify the accepted rules for behavior in this forum? I acknowledged some while back that though I did not really agree with the mod-responses, I readily accepted them. You have some objection to that position?
If folk stopped posting in this thread, I would certainly do so as well. But I thought that it was to some extent common courtesy around here to not abandon a thread one started. When you posted for the first time down on the 2d or 3d page of this thread - which had pretty clearly been resolved to my satisfaction - would your preference have been that neither I nor anyone else respond to you?
You’re just being dumb, now. The mods who responded here have said that posters should not expect this rule to be enforced unless the post is reported. I don’t know what else you would call that.
Of course, of course. What may look rather startingly like an insistence on having the last word is in reality only common courtesy, since refraining from posting further after the resolution of the issue would be “abandoning a thread one started” – so rude!
Farbeit from me to impede the exercise of such courtesy. I bow out of the thread, leaving you to zealously defend it against all hypothetical accusations of thread abandonment.
If an “insult” (more like a throwaway comment or a one-liner) that the rules themselves say is perfectly acceptable is enough to drive some of you guys into the deep (and whiny) depression you describe, it may be time to quit the Internet and seek assertiveness training.
Wrong thread. TOTALLY inappropriate.
And if you cannot engage in polite conversation in IMHO without calling other posters “idiots”, it may be time to limit your posting to The BBQ Pit, because no amount of amateur lawyering is going to make that practice acceptable.
Funny you should use the term “amateur lawyering”, because that’s the exact same contrivance that brought this peculiar enforcement of no rule in particular into being.