You honestly don’t understand? The point is that in this forum you don’t need to ideologically recapitulate the discourse just to discuss posting protocol. It was shamelessly gratuitous.
No.
FTR, had the post he was responding to been filled with misspellings and grammatical errors and basically incoherent, I think it would have been fine to ask it the way you’re doing, however that wasn’t what happened.
RNATB said
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15321670&postcount=82
I responded by saying.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15321738&postcount=88
He then responded by accusing me of posting while drunk.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15323085&postcount=106
I honestly don’t see how any reasonable person could see it anything other than an insult particularly in the context of the conversation and I also don’t understand why Marley felt that it was somehow less objectionable than referring to a racist assertion as “a racist assertion”.
RNATB’s statement was pretty obviously racist (or, if the standard dodge is to be used, “it wasn’t racist you offenderati, it was bigoted!”). The suggestion that a Palestinian cannot render proper judgement on the issue simply because he’s a Palestinian is, indeed, stating that a person’s individual merit does not matter and that his group determines his cognitive capabilities. That RNATB has a history of supporting racist ideology makes it even less of a “groundless” observation.
Marley, you fucked up on that count. “Your argument is racist” or “that claim is racist” is and has been allowed in GD for as long as I’ve been posting here. “You are posting as if you’re drunk” is, however, not.
On a side note, Ibn, the mods/admins here have been known to craft unique rules to deal with behaviors they don’t like. Your “your post is stupid” (or what have you) is evidently fast approaching the point where the crafting of a unique rule is becoming increasingly likely. You’d probably be well served to start picking apart arguments, which you’re generally pretty good at, without resorting to pejorative descriptions of those arguments. Even though it should be perfectly street-legal to call an argument stupid, the mods are angling to make it a rules violation in your case.
Ok, I see what you’re referring to.
I’ll add that I didn’t type up the long post because I enjoyed doing so(I didn’t) but merely to explain the context. The reason being is that I generally don’t like it when someone says “X happened on this post and the mods did nothing” without providing context because context is everything.
In retrospect, I should have made the first post vastly shorter for people perusing the forum.
For that I do apologize.
It was condescending. It wasn’t an insult. If you don’t like condescension stay out of GD.
Yes, it was an insult. Trying to pretend that ‘you’re posting as if you’re drunk’ isn’t an insult is beneath you.
I’d just as soon not weaken the term “racist” by calling all derogatory references to groups racist. But I suspect this is your thing, so go for it.
You think “are you drunk” isn’t an insult?
If someone responded to a post by saying to another poster “are you retarded” or “I’m guessing you’ve never been laid” would you also argue that those aren’t insults but merely examples of “condescension”.
I can pretty much guarantee that if you make such comments outside of the Pit and they would most certainly be considered insulting.
So then you think it’s wrong to use the term “racist” to refer to the statements “Mexicans always steal”, “Arabs can’t be trusted” and “the Chinese are monsters”?
Also, it’s not my “thing”. It’s generally understood that such statements are racists and I’ve never heard any victims of racism make the arguments you’re making.
For example, I’ve never heard any black people object to classify anti-Mexican or anti-Puerto Rican comments as “racist”. In fact, I’ve heard more than a few use that term.
I did say that Really Not All That Bright’s comment about posting drunk was not appropriate for GD. I added that Ibn Warraq’s accusation of racism was also unwanted - partly because it seemed to have nothing to do with anything, which meant it was probably going to lead to a hijack. And as a reminder, this is not the place to argue the thread topic all over again; ATMB is for discussions of the rules.
We now continue with another string of insult analogies.
I actually don’t get upset about being asked to tone down the use of terms like “stupid” when describing arguments and have been making a point to instead rip apart arguments or if I classify them as stupid going into detail as to why they’re stupid.
I know some may find this hard to believe, but I do like both Marley and Tom(at least as much as you can like someone you’ve never met and probably never will meet), don’t like giving them headaches by having people constantly report posts they view as personal insults, and with rare exceptions, generally agree with their decisions.
Actually, you only said it was “somewhat inappropriate for this forum” which is a bit of a tepid response, whereas you claimed my referring to his assertion as “racist” was both “inappropriate and seemingly groundless” which seems to indicate that you found it more obnoxious to call a racist assertion a “racist assertion” than to accuse another poster of being drunk.
This is compounded by the fact that you moderated my post but have specifically refused to moderate his post.
Now I don’t see why it’s worse to call a racist assertion a “racist assertion” then to accuse another poster of being drunk particularly since you have repeatedly ruled that is okay to refer to posts or arguments as racist but have gone further and ruled that it is permissible, in some circumstances to call other posters racist or sexist.
I didn’t accuse him of racism I said his post was racist, which it was. There’s a massive difference and you yourself have repeatedly said there is a difference.
Also, you went a bit farther than just saying my comment was “unwanted”. You claimed it was “inappropriate and groundless” and felt the need to moderate it but not an allegation of being drunk.
I’m sorry, but as Finn said, “you fucked up on that count”.
You can’t argue that it’s okay to call arguments “racist” which you have repeatedly done so and then say “no you can’t” particularly when the post in question was clearly racist, as pointed out by Finn who no one would mistake for being an apologist for the Palestinians.
Ibn Warraq, i like you; you’re a smart guy, and i agree with a lot of the things you post on this board. Not all of them, but a lot.
But if you’re going to get into a rules-lawyering debate about borderline insults, you probably need to look a bit more closely at your own posting style.
All of those are from the last couple of months.
Yes, yes, i know: the mods have made clear that you can call the post “racist” or “ignorant,” and maybe even moronic (not sure on that one). But if you leave the rules-lawyering aside for a moment, and be honest with yourself, you really have to admit that accusations of posting drunk are no more offensive or insulting than accusations of ignorance, racism, or being a moron. You give at least as good as you get in GD, and this petulant whining about a snarky comment is rather unbecoming, given your willingness to deliver thinly-veiled insults.
Thank you.
And I will happily defend every one of those claims. Most those are snippets of posts in which I did go into detail as to why such phrases were used. Furthermore, the context is important. I don’t want to hijack the thread, but with two exceptions those were arguments with “race realists” who were making statements which were rather clearly and obviously racist and stupid. In fact, the strongest of those was directed at New Deal Democrat who was eventually banned for his behavior.
And yes, I see nothing wrong with calling most of his posts stupid, racist, or a whole host of other adjectives because they were. I’m pretty sure the mods agreed with me and several made similar comments on those threads as well.
The two exceptions was Valteron, who was making one of his periodic Islamophobic polemics for which he was in danger of getting banned until recently. I would defend my statements about his post on that thread as well and I’m pretty sure the mods would agree. The other was al27052 who was accusing me of being untrustworthy when it came to Middle Eastern affairs simply because of my nationality, for which he was modded.
Again, I would defend my statements to him.
Those were also rather extreme circumstances which are not normally replicated.
Yes, but my comments were in each and every case not directed at the people personally, but at their arguments. There’s a massive difference between “you’re argument is stupid” and “you’re stupid”.
RNATB was directing his comments at me personally not at my posts or my argument.
It wasn’t “a snark comment” it was an insult. Furthermore, what I’m upset about is that Marley decided that it was less objectionable than calling a clearly racist assertion a “racist assertion” and decided to mod note my post, which was not an insult, but not RNATB’s post which was rather clearly an insult, not at being accused of posting while drunk by a person on the internet whom I’ve never met and never will meet.
Except I don’t “deliver thinly-veilied insults”. Calling a post “stupid” or “racist” is not an insult. Accusing a poster of being stupid or drunk is.
The golden rule of board is supposed to be address the post not the poster. I directed my comments RNATB’s post not at him whereas his insult was very clearly directed at me.
If people would only learn to use better insults, like Lirpa Sloof, we’d all be better off. I’m really tired of the same old boring ones.
That’s true. Accusing someone of posting while drunk isn’t terribly original.
I’d actually have been more amused if he’d been a bit more creative with his insults.
None of this makes any difference to my argument.
For what it’s worth, i agreed with basically every one of your posts. The statements you were criticizing were, in my opinion, racist and ignorant and moronic. But that doesn’t change the fact that calling them that is insulting. Even if something is true, that doesn’t mean it’s not an insult.
I recognize that the board makes such a distinction in the rules, and that there is a certain difference between them, but that doesn’t mean that saying “you’re argument is stupid” isn’t insulting.
Again, i’m not interested in the rules-lawyering aspect of this. I’m interested in what people actually find insulting. For me, having one of my posts called “stupid” or “ignorant” would be at least as insulting as being accused of being drunk.
YMM—and obviously does—V, but you can’t pretend that there is some absolute, objective line that’s been crossed here. So you are insulted when someone accuses you of being drunk? Big deal. I’m not. So whose feelings should the definition of “insult” defer to?
One could easily argue that an accusation of drunkenness might imply something like, “Hey, this post is really dumb, and i don’t expect that from you. Are you drunk or something?”
But again, as i’ve said before, i’m not interested in the rules-lawyering aspects of this. Even if you’re right within the letter of the rules, you skate so close to them, in a manner that’s clearly intentional and designed to offend people, that i don’t think you have much cause to complain.
None of this changes my opinion about your more general contributions to the board. I just think you should be willing to get as good as you give. And i say that as someone who has, myself, skated close to the line in GD in exactly the same way that you do.
It may be insulting but it’s not an insult. I could write a very long post that puts down your ideas without resorting to insults. Sure there is sometimes a fine line but I don’t think it was crossed.
How is it “insulting but not an insult”?
since you think it’s not an insult to ask “are you drunk” then how about “are you stupid” or “you don’t get laid very often”.
Beyond that Dex clearly thinks it’s an insult unless meant as a joke or simply as a genuine question though Marley has refused to say whether he thinks it was an insult or not.
Beyond that, arguing, as Marley seems to, that calling a poster’s assertions “racist” is more objectionable than accusing another poster of being drunk and such a ruling is hypocritical and intellectually inconsistent.
As Finn noted, this board has always ruled that it’s permissible to call another person’s arguments “racist” but has always said that personal insults are a violation of board policy.
Now perhaps Marley could better explain whether or not he considered accusing another poster of posting while drunk an insult as well as why he found it less offensive than calling a racist assertion a “racist assertion”(unless one wants to try the standard dodge of “It wasn’t racist it was bigoted!”).
Unfortunately he hasn’t.
Is being drunk a terrible thing to you, Ibn Warraq? Do you not drink? Maybe this is the reason it seems so insulting to you. Because to me, being accused of posting drunk is not a big insult, but if you don’t drink, maybe it is. Just curious.