# Is this really worth a warning? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [January 28, 2016, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472 "2016-01-28T06:35:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/141 "2016-02-02T05:35:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yeah, it’s amazing how some people in this thread have made up their minds and are not open to the idea that they might be wrong. Take a crack at it, then. Tell me the reasonable alternative explanation. ---
**Author:** ![Cazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cazzle/32/75_2.png) [@Cazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cazzle)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/142 "2016-02-02T05:53:04Z")
> [@NJ22](#): > > Well I’m glad the instigator was banned because normally the troll gets no infraction and the responder gets smacked with a suspension. Jaded from all your years of seeing this happen here? ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/143 "2016-02-02T06:30:44Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Take a crack at it, then. Tell me the reasonable alternative explanation. Asks someone who doesn’t believe that reasonable alternative explanations exist. There have been several proposed, including **Miller** ’s. You yourself said that you were “turning” the insult against him. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/144 "2016-02-02T06:31:01Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Take a crack at it, then. Tell me the reasonable alternative explanation. We’ve telling you. That’s the trouble. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/145 "2016-02-02T12:30:11Z")
Three, soon to be four, pages. I’ll wait for the movie. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/146 "2016-02-02T13:25:27Z")
[QUOTE=SenorBeef] Take a crack at it, then. Tell me the reasonable alternative explanation. [/QUOTE] there is no need for a reasonable alternative explanation - yours works just fine. He insulted you, you insulted him back. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/147 "2016-02-02T13:41:47Z")
> [@](#): > > 4.65 \> 4.62. Turns out you’re the bigger loser. I actually agree with **SenorBeef**. When read in context, there is an unwritten qualifier, “by your own logic.” When you apply that qualifier, **SenorBeef** is not calling whatshisname a loser. To me, that’s the obvious and natural meaning, but I understand everyone’s interpretation of written language is different. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/148 "2016-02-02T13:57:14Z")
Just my $1.59’s worth … Whatever the motivation of the first who said “You’re a loser” … the second was, in part, retaliation … a more serious issue. It’s the second person who throw a punch that’s guilty of fighting. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/149 "2016-02-02T15:01:09Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Just my $1.59’s worth … > > Whatever the motivation of the first who said “You’re a loser” … the second was, in part, retaliation … a more serious issue. It’s the second person who throw a punch that’s guilty of fighting. Not really. That’s self defense. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/150 "2016-02-02T15:11:39Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I’m kind of amazed at how hard people are trying to miss the point. > > Ask yourself: How did I insult him? I said “you’re the bigger loser” Why did I do that? Was it just totally out of the blue? I decided I didn’t like the guy so I just picked a random name to call him? Or because I think that posting 4.6 posts per day, which I do myself, is what makes someone a loser even though I gave no indication whatsoever that I associated post counts with being a loser? Neither of those make any sense. > > No, I called him a loser because he established a criteria that he used to call me a loser. I pointed out that **by his own criteria** , that makes him the bigger loser. He insulted himself more than he insulted me. What I said was a refutation of his insult, not an insult to him. Just because a poster defines X as an insult, doesn’t mean X can’t be assigned to that poster. You did not refute an insult-- you threw the insult back at the guy who threw it at you. And insult needn’t be “out of the blue”, because you “didn’t like the guy” and it can even be some characteristic you have yourself. A reasonable interpretation is that you were pissed at him for insulting you, and you decided to turn the insult back on him. That’s what it looks like to most of the folks posting in this thread. The fact that you can’t see it is not an indictment of us. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/151 "2016-02-02T16:28:36Z")
> [@Clark\_K](#): > > No, Poster B did not. > > First, Poster B was not talking directly to Barack Obama. Even if the substance of a comment is largely the same, saying it TO someone rather than ABOUT someone undeniably makes if more personal. > > Second, Poster B softened it by phrasing it as a question. “I guess Barack Obama is a racist as well, huh?” is simply not as harsh as “Turns out you’re the bigger loser.” > > Third, Poster B did not have the history that led the moderator to conclude Senor Beef was once again walking up to, and over, the insult line. > > The context shows us that Poster B was using a rhetorical device to make a point and that Senor Beef _ **tried** _ to use a rhetorical device but did it so clumsily that he turned it into an insult. Thanks for your reply, Clark! I _knew_ it wasn’t that hard of a question! As for your two points. I agree that a second-person statement is pretty much always going to be more personal than a third-person statement. That’s pretty much the nature of how ‘person’ works. But the degree of personality is a different axis from the insultingness of a statement. “Turns out you’re the bigger loser” is more personal, but equally insulting to, “Turns out he’s the bigger loser.” For your other point, I agree. The hypothetical statement was softened. Let’s pretend instead Poster B said, “Turns out Barack Obama is racist” in the same context. Would that be an insult? ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/152 "2016-02-02T17:16:51Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I actually agree with **SenorBeef**. When read in context, there is an unwritten qualifier, “by your own logic.” When you apply that qualifier, **SenorBeef** is not calling whatshisname a loser. To me, that’s the obvious and natural meaning, but I understand everyone’s interpretation of written language is different. If it’s unwritten, then there’s nothing to interpret. We can only interpret actual words written on the page. There’s so much tap dancing going on in this thread, I feel like I’m watching a Fred Astaire movie. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/153 "2016-02-02T18:15:27Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I actually agree with **SenorBeef**. When read in context, there is an unwritten qualifier, “by your own logic.” When you apply that qualifier, **SenorBeef** is not calling whatshisname a loser. To me, that’s the obvious and natural meaning, but I understand everyone’s interpretation of written language is different. Why is it not an insult if I say “by you’re own logic, you’re an idiot”? I’m still calling the guy an idiot. Even if you explicit write those magic words, I don’t see why they would be a get out of jail free card. ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/154 "2016-02-02T18:55:15Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > If it’s unwritten, then there’s nothing to interpret. We can only interpret actual words written on the page. I believe this is known as message board fundamentalism. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Why is it not an insult if I say “by you’re own logic, you’re an idiot”? I’m still calling the guy an idiot. Even if you explicit write those magic words, I don’t see why they would be a get out of jail free card. My interpretation is different. If you say, “anyone named John is an idiot.” And I respond, “by your own logic, you are an idiot.” Did I just call you an idiot? I don’t think I did. I explained that if you apply your standard of what constitutes an idiot, then you meet it. I have not proclaimed my own standard nor whether you meet it. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/155 "2016-02-02T19:08:49Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > My interpretation is different. If you say, “anyone named John is an idiot.” And I respond, “by your own logic, you are an idiot.” Did I just call you an idiot? I don’t think I did. I explained that if you apply your standard of what constitutes an idiot, then you meet it. I have not proclaimed my own standard nor whether you meet it. **SenorBeef** didn’t say that. He said > [@](#): > > Turns out you’re the bigger loser. (His exact wording.) I don’t see this as anything but a direct insult. There was no qualifier. I don’t see how anyone can honestly interpret it as anything else. ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/156 "2016-02-02T19:57:47Z")
I’m aware of his exact wording. I was responding to John Mace. **SenorBeef** ’s qualifier is unstated. If you just look at the single sentence you posted, it’s right there in black in white and no interpretation is necessary. But you’d be examining the statement out of context. If you read it in full, along with the other guy’s argument, the reader will infer the “by your logic” qualifier. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/157 "2016-02-02T20:05:00Z")
Unfortunately, the rules don’t cover that. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/158 "2016-02-02T20:11:06Z")
The “by your own logic, you’re an idiot” defense reminds me of the “stop hitting yourself!” defense, which has never been very successful either. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/159 "2016-02-02T21:06:44Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The “by your own logic, you’re an idiot” defense reminds me of the “stop hitting yourself!” defense, which has never been very successful either. Did you mean to post this in the “What’s an example of a non-sequitur” thread? ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472/160 "2016-02-02T23:14:41Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I believe this is known as message board fundamentalism. I’ve been message boarding a long time and I’ve never heard that, “by your own logic” were the magical words you claim them to be. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-really-worth-a-warning/744472.md?page=9)