# I don't think "leaving Cesario out of it" is the answer **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [February 12, 2010, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726 "2010-02-12T16:39:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/1 "2010-02-12T16:39:26Z")
[As indicated in this warning issued by **GFactor**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12107801&postcount=34), it appears we are not allowed to refer to Cesario’s pedophilia at all. That doesn’t seem right - when **Evil Captor** was restricted from talking about his favourite subject everywhere, I don’t recall us getting a gag order that we weren’t allowed to reference him and his predilection in relevant threads. I understand **Ed Zotti’s** ruling to mean that Cesario is not to be talking about his pedophilia any longer, and we are not to provoke him into doing so, but a comment in a thread calling Cesario a pedophile is just stating a fact, not provoking him. Surely we aren’t censoring facts here, are we? ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/2 "2010-02-12T16:49:28Z")
Was that a warning or a note? Could it be that the timing of things makes things a bit more sensitive? Could the nature of the references (one is almost guaranteed to be an insult by default) be the difference? And lastly, what content does a post lose by not bringing up the particular poster? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/3 "2010-02-12T16:56:17Z")
I suspect that it would be rare for someone to state a simple fact such as “Cesario is a pedophile” without it being part of a larger commentary. If Cesario happens to disagree with the larger commentary then it is very unfair on him because he is not allowed to comment. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/4 "2010-02-12T17:01:44Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > Surely we aren’t censoring facts here, are we? Another problem of note is that certain “facts” posted about him aren’t true and he’s powerless to correct them. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/5 "2010-02-12T17:06:38Z")
I don’t understand why it’s necessary to mention Cesario at all. Why do you care about him? What possible thread could there be where it was absolutely necessary to bring him up? Why not just leave him out of any discussion? Also, why is this board so focussed on kiddie porn and pedophilia now? It’s getting kind of gross. ---
**Author:** ![Pray\_for\_peace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Pray\_for\_peace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pray_for_peace)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/6 "2010-02-12T17:13:58Z")
I will defer to the mods on this, but I think there’s a difference between saying “Cesario is a pedophile” (IIRC he has self-identified as such, or at least not objected to others’ use of the term as applied to him) and saying “Cesario has said X and Y but does not agree with Z” about pedophilia or sex with children. The latter statement characterizes his specific statements, and he has no opportunity to respond if a mischaracterization is made. Even quoting Cesario’s old posts is probably not fair to him because a quote can be misleading if it’s out of context. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/7 "2010-02-12T17:14:36Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > I don’t understand why it’s necessary to mention Cesario at all. Why do you care about him? What possible thread could there be where it was absolutely necessary to bring him up? Why not just leave him out of any discussion? > > Also, why is this board so focussed on kiddie porn and pedophilia now? It’s getting kind of gross. I’m sure certain topics get a rise out of people for a while then disappear. This time it’s pedo; next time will be something else. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/8 "2010-02-12T17:16:39Z")
> [@Sidney Evgeni Jordan](#): > > I will defer to the mods on this, but I think there’s a difference between saying “Cesario is a pedophile” (IIRC he has self-identified as such, or at least not objected to others’ use of the term as applied to him) and saying “Cesario has said X and Y but does not agree with Z” about pedophilia or sex with children. The latter statement characterizes his specific statements, and he has no opportunity to respond if a mischaracterization is made. Even quoting Cesario’s old posts is probably not fair to him because a quote can be misleading if it’s out of context. Why not simply not mention him at all? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/9 "2010-02-12T17:16:47Z")
> [@Bearflag70](#): > > Another problem of note is that certain “facts” posted about him aren’t true and he’s powerless to correct them. Yes, the board is able to make up its own history about him at the moment and no one is there to nitpick the little inaccuracies to keep the history somewhat truthful. Imagine if every other thread was about you and you weren’t allowed to make any comment. And yes, I know I’m playing my small part in it all just by commenting in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Pray\_for\_peace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Pray\_for\_peace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pray_for_peace)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/10 "2010-02-12T17:23:23Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > Why not simply not mention him at all? Yeah, I agree. I was responding to the OP’s question, not suggesting that we should be mentioning his name. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/11 "2010-02-12T17:29:51Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > I don’t understand why it’s necessary to mention Cesario at all. Why do you care about him? What possible thread could there be where it was absolutely necessary to bring him up? Why not just leave him out of any discussion? > > Also, why is this board so focussed on kiddie porn and pedophilia now? It’s getting kind of gross. Agreed. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/12 "2010-02-12T17:49:33Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Was that a warning or a note? Just to confirm, that is a Moderator Note, rather than an official warning. **Gfactor** did not issue any infraction to any of the posters involved. I am not speaking for **Gfactor** , but it seems to me that was intended to head off further specific discussion of **Cesario** in that thread. I would also note that **Contrapuntal** had not merely mentioned **Cesario’s** predilection, but described what he thought was **Cesario’s** position on the age of consent. This would open the door to further discussion of **Cesario’s** position, to which he would be unable to respond. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/13 "2010-02-12T17:55:25Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > Also, why is this board so focussed on kiddie porn and pedophilia now? It’s getting kind of gross. I think a serious consideration is that people searching for such things (e.g., googling) are liable to find our Message Boards, and be attracted to us like flames to a moth. My suggestion: stop discussing this. ---
**Author:** ![Wakinyan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wakinyan/32/352_2.png) [@Wakinyan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wakinyan)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/14 "2010-02-12T17:59:17Z")
That is a very good idea. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/15 "2010-02-12T17:59:51Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Just to confirm, that is a Moderator Note, rather than an official warning. **Gfactor** did not issue any infraction to any of the posters involved. I am not speaking for **Gfactor** , but it seems to me that was intended to head off further specific discussion of **Cesario** in that thread. > > I would also note that **Contrapuntal** had not merely mentioned **Cesario’s** predilection, but described what he thought was **Cesario’s** position on the age of consent. This would open the door to further discussion of **Cesario’s** position, to which he would be unable to respond. This. It was clearly marked as a moderator note. And it was required by Ed’s post, to which I linked. We’ve already disussed the merits of Ed’s decision on this topic in several threads. I’m at work right now and will be unavailable tonight, so any further responses from me will probably come after that. ---
**Author:** ![dhkendall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a9adbd/32.png) [@dhkendall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dhkendall)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/16 "2010-02-12T18:45:02Z")
> [@Bearflag70](#): > > Another problem of note is that certain “facts” posted about him aren’t true and he’s powerless to correct them. Yes, I must admit I was guilty of that, wandering into a thread, admittedly only hearing of his “infamy” through what is said about him rather than what he actually posted (as I haven’t seen hardly any of his own posts, he and I usually hanging out in different forums). I then mentioned something that I thought was true, but wasn’t. I was reminded of Ed’s ruling, and quickly left the thread. 🙂 (I was hoping to stick around to thank the Dopers who fought my ignorance, as they did indeed deserve my thanks, but I figured once the warning went up I figured it was best to high-tail it out of there posthaste, my record seems to be clean for now, hope to keep it that way … ) ---
**Author:** ![smoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@smoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smoke)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/17 "2010-02-12T18:49:05Z")
I personally think it’s crazy to have rules that apply only to an individual poster, and discussions mentioning that poster. If a poster is highjacking, warn them. If they’re being jerks, warn them. If they continue, ban them. If someone is making spurious claims about another poster, or baiting them, same thing - warn/ban. The individual rules are just frustrating, and I think it’s unfortunate (but also unfortunately unsurprising) that the rules here have been gamed into their current nebulous complexity. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/18 "2010-02-12T19:06:43Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > I don’t understand why it’s necessary to mention Cesario at all. Why do you care about him? What possible thread could there be where it was absolutely necessary to bring him up? Why not just leave him out of any discussion? My point is that he seems to be getting a special treatment that he doesn’t deserve - in the similar situation that I noted in my OP, that of **Evil Captor** , we weren’t bound to not talk about him like we seem to be getting bound to not talk about Cesario. I have no particular interest in talking about either of them, but after **Evil Captor** was restricted, we still did reference him quite frequently. > [@](#): > > Also, why is this board so focussed on kiddie porn and pedophilia now? It’s getting kind of gross. It’s just the _topic du jour_. It’ll blow over. I agree, **smoke** , but I’m trying to work with what we have now. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/19 "2010-02-12T19:19:09Z")
I guess what I’m aiming for here is clarification of a rule that seems to be taken from a previous one, but is being interpreted differently this time. Is any reference to Cesario okay? Can we say things like, “We’re a board that has self-admitted pedophiles as members, like Cesario”? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726/20 "2010-02-12T19:36:37Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > I guess what I’m aiming for here is clarification of a rule that seems to be taken from a previous one, but is being interpreted differently this time. There’s your problem. It’s not “taken from a previous one.” It is similar in some ways to the **Evil Captor** rule, but it is an individual one specific to **Cesario**. > [@](#): > > Is any reference to Cesario okay? Depends on the context. > [@](#): > > Can we say things like, “We’re a board that has self-admitted pedophiles as members, like Cesario”? I’m having trouble imagining exactly why you would want to say such a thing. What is your point? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-leaving-cesario-out-of-it-is-the-answer/528726.md?page=2)