I previously requested that you dial it back. (And it’s rather ironic for you to accuse others of being intentionally inciteful while making this kind of remark.) If you continue in this manner you may be subject to a warning for violation of moderator instructions.
I should also note that you seem to have strong opinions on the rules, even though you apparently don’t actually know much about them or how they are applied. I would suggest that you read the registration agreement and the various stickies on the rules and board FAQs before you continue to debate about them.
And that’s not even getting into the fact that Rand Rover isn’t black. (A minor point in this otherwise critical debate on who you can call a nigger, I know.)
Although I’d be lying if I wasn’t hoping for a sequel to this thread: “is nonsensical hate speech still racist?” Can I refer to skateboards as spics and buy one get one free coupons as kikes? What if I want to start a Pit thread wherein I repeatedly call the feeling of existential despair a nigger? What then??
I think someone asked about the timing of the reports here. Just to clear that up, no one reported the OP. We received one report about Rand Rover’s post early Saturday morning. I hadn’t looked at the thread before getting a report, so I didn’t have an opportunity to give a note to Wesley Clark before Rand Rover posted.
That’s correct. I think you’re assuming I’d have some kind of objection to this, but I wouldn’t. I can’t take it seriously and I wouldn’t call you an asshole for it. I might ask if you were going to buy a gumball with the extra tax revenue.
Like I said, I’ve seen instances like this in the past. I’ve never warned somebody for a reference to another poster unless the post itself was insulting, although I’ve told them to stop doing it because the other poster might take it as an insult if he sees the thread. I don’t think this name-check, however ill advised, was worth a warning on its own. If Rand Rover had reported the post and said nothing, or just responded to Wesley Clark’s position, I wouldn’t have warned him.
Come on now. This is a message board, not a fight on the playground. If there isn’t some kind of basic level of civility, the whole thing doesn’t work. I know we have more rules here than a lot of other places, but it’s not asking too much to say that even if you think someone is insulting you, you shouldn’t stoop to their level.
I’m not seeing the mental gymnastics here. One poster broke a rule and the other didn’t.
The offensive part in your example is “that nigger,” not ‘raise his taxes.’ Not all references to an undefined group of people are offensive- they’re usually allowed with no problem. Racist remarks about groups or individuals are not allowed.
You should not have warned anybody. But if you just had to bust out the warning stick, then both guys deserve the same amount of licks. What Wesley did is just as bad as what Rand did. If Wesley skates, then Rand should skate too.
I don’t bring up the conservative/liberal or thinly disguised fat kid/cool kid thing to bust your chops. I honestly and sincerely believe that conservatives are routinely treated more harshly than liberals here. Not just by you. The mod staff has a tendency to “not see a problem” with things that are offensive to conservatives, or intended to bait conservatives. It may not be intentional…but it is noticeable.
I believe that some conservatives fight back in a manner that might be unsuitable for this forum. This might be due to the type of discourse allowed, and often encouraged, on many national television and radio programs dominated by conservative pundits.
Likewise, certain liberals intentionally taunt conservatives in ways completely inappropriate for this forum, and rarely, if ever, get called on the carpet for it. This is why certain conservatives are sometimes tempted to respond in kind.
I think I see the problem here-you seem to think that “taunt” and “personally insult” have the same definition. This would explain your thinking you are “responding in kind” when in fact you are escalating the situation.
It ain’t me involved in most of the controversy. I generally follow the rules, and come to this particular forum to discuss them. What I would like to do, and what I actually do, are often two different things. If I were a mod, I’d probably avoid most partisan conversations on the board. If I’m wearing the striped shirt, I’d call it down the middle. But this isn’t about me.
No, it’s about your particular definition of “middle”, which doesn’t seem to match up with the stated rules of the game here. Redefining “taunt” as “personal insult”, and banning the use of both for that reason would not be a solution that would benefit this board, imho.
a) Yes, I do know that. I was a mod elsewhere for over a decade. The other main mod there was very much closer to Czarcasm’s politics than mine, and we remain friends to this day. Very different forum, with very different rules, but I called it down the middle. Including banning a couple of high profile, popular posters that refused to follow the rules. I don’t play favorites. Same rules for everybody. Look at what I do as a non-mod. I backed Dio, who I am known to dislike, against Rand when I thought Rand was out of line. I don’t particularly like Rand, but I’m backing him here, because he got a raw deal.
b) That much is true. As a mod, sometimes anything you do is going to piss somebody off. Modding is challenging. I’m a lot more outspoken and volatile here as a poster than I would be as a mod. As a poster, I can tell somebody to kiss my ass, rail against whatever happens to annoy me at the moment, and otherwise let her rip when I wanna. As a mod, ya can’t do that kind of thing. Or at least you have to tone it down a bit.
c) This place needs more political balance on the mod staff. Y’all are heavily lefty, and sometimes just don’t hear the righty point of view.
I’m sure you do. That does not make it so, however. In my experience, conservatives frequently demonstrate martyr complexes even when they are being treated fairly.Their idea of fair and balanced is an overwhelming bias in favor of conservative values. Case in point: many conservatives think John Stewart is biased against conservatives because he goes after Fox News and Sarah Palin regularly. That he also lampoons the Obama administration and Democrats on the Hill doesn’t make any difference; if he makes fun of conservatives, he is biased against them.
The trouble is that you don’t want the rules enforced as they now stand. You want the rules changed to make overly broad the definition of “personal insult”.
It is not just me. Go look through my Czarcasm threads in this very forum. Several reputable posters, including Bricker, have made similar comments. If I was the only one that ever said anything, it would be easier to just ignore me…but I’m not.
Sometimes, I think conservatives are not really welcome here. And that’s a shame. Despite what so many of the rudest and most obnoxious GD regulars, and at least one former mod say, we are not all evil, stupid, mean, stinky, not nice people. Some of us are pretty smart, and fun at parties.
If you want the rules changed you should start a thread on the subject, but I don’t think the mods should reinterpret them just to create an artificial “balance”.
