Well most of you are familiar with the current pit thread Fuck the Motherfucking Pope. The title of my thread simply reflects a well repeated charge that the prophet was a child fucker.
Why did I bring this up? Because many of you realize that the title was quite incendiary. I maintain no less so for the many devout Roman Catholics throughout our global society. The question is, why have the powers that be of this message board permitted this ongoing thread?
Now all of this is no skin off my nose, exept for the fact that I was reprimanded for addressing a fellow poster with the expression “fuck you”
Somewhat surprised, I checked with the stickies[url=Restricted language in the Pit - The BBQ Pit - Straight Dope Message Board] above the pit page and lo and behold I was in contravention. I have to conclude that the powers that be want to protect posters from sexual insults, but couldn’t care less about their venerated personalities.
Now, I have long held a rule in my life which I teach others which is that if you are presented a rule, you need to establish the purpose in your mind as to why the rule exists. I can understand that the PTB want to clean up the language. Yet that objective obviously doesn’t matter with the pope thread. I can understand protecting free speech amongst posters by eliminating gratuitous insults. Yet clearly there are many ways to insult a poster without telling him to go fuck himself. No controls there.
In short, I demand the PTB to explain why this qualified rule, which makes no sense in terms of reasonable attainable objectives exists.
Frankly, I can understand a rule and am much more likely to be able to comply if I am aware of the reason for it. Can anyone one here tell me why there is a need to refrain from specifically sexual and body function insults towards other posters while non sexual insults are permitted yet at the same time permitted to direct sexual insults to others?
The thread title in the Pit (and the language in general) are allowed because Because Muhammad and the Pope don’t post here. So we’re not concerned about their feelings. And I’ve edited your thread title. This thread it’s in the Pit, and your original title was borderline trolling.
You called a question about board rules “Fuck the child fucking Prophet of Islam” and you’re surprised I said you were borderline trolling? I could just as easily have warned you but I cut you some slack. And for that matter I know what you meant by “xxxx xxx.” So I suggest you wise up in a hurry.
It wasn’t trolling at all in my view - it wasn’t gratuitous abuse, it was illustrating by allegory. Being deliberately shocking for a good reason is not trolling.
By definition that’s pretty much what it is. That being said, the thread title has been dealt with, so let’s get back to the issue The Flying Dutchman wanted to talk about. (I do think this has been dealt with plenty of times already.) The title of the Pit thread is allowed because it’s the Pit. We don’t restrict insults of public figures and people who don’t post here. In general we don’t much care what gets said about people who don’t post here. So when some insults were restricted, it applied only when they were directed against people who post here. We’re not going to ban all insulting comments against posters or anyone else. It’d be futile and it wouldn’t be fun.
Well explain to me why the motherfucking pope title wasn’t trolliing
Oh God. It must be nice to be a moderator and be able to edit a warning line seven minutes later out of your posts.
Hey big boy. I never said you were stupid. I am aware however that you are gunning for me. We have a history. Needless to say I think you are a complete …
For starters it’s actually about the Pope, so it’s not just a catchy title designed to get attention. Your thread isn’t about Islam, it’s about the forum rules. If you started an actual pitting of Muhammad with that title I expect you wouldn’t have a problem.
I didn’t edit out a warning. I added the line that said And for that matter I know what you meant by “xxxx xxx.” So I suggest you wise up in a hurry.
If I were gunning for you (based on two warnings I gave you in February) I’d have warned you for the thread title or the implied insults in either of your last two posts. I haven’t, so either you’re wrong or I’m really chipper today. Now back off. You’re hijacking your own thread at this point.
What was the point of this thread again? Why can we say “fuck the Pope” but not “fuck, you, [random Doper]?” I think that’s been answered already: the Pope doesn’t post here (as far as we know), and, well, he’s the Pope. You can’t be much more of a public figure than that.
That’s not what I said, but if that’s the lesson you want to take from my posts, be my guest.
There was never a warning. The original post went read:
So there was never a warning. I’d already decided a caution would get the job done. You’re welcome.
I did not assassinate your character. I described your actions. As a mod, I’m allowed to tell you to stop doing something if you’re breaking a rule or suggest you take a step back if you’re on the verge of doing so. That means I’m allowed to tell you what you’re doing wrong. If I want you to stop doing something I have to tell you what you did. And that’s what I did when I said “your original title was borderline trolling.” And if you reread the post, you’ll notice I referred to the title as “borderline trolling.” I didn’t say “you’re a troll.” I described your actions and not your personality.
Why are you deliberately trying to get in trouble?
If you actually received a Warning, you can post the PM that notified you of that Warning. If you never received such a PM, then you know that you did not receive a Warning, so you know that he never actually Warned you. Making an accusation that he deleted a Warning that you know was never issued may make you feel like you are scoring points with the peanut gallery, but it fails on the level of honest discussion.
I have looked at the separate versions of Marley’s edited post and they agree in all particulars with his description of them.
Pardon me, but while it’s not well known, in reality I am my Holiness, the Pope. God’s Right Hand Man on Earth and Heir to St Peter’s Throne* and speaking on behalf of myself and my cousin Mohammad, I find both this discussion and the one in the Pit to be in poor taste.
*Hey, if Mel Gibson’s dad can be the Pope, so can I.
When I first read Marley’s post, #2 in the thread, there was definitely a line at the bottom which read “No warning issued” or very similar words to that effect… Holy xxxx I said to myself, did my OP even come close to require a warning? Upon being reminded that no warning was issued I happened to look back and noticed the line missing and an edit comment 7 minutes later. Just why was that neccesary ? And it occured to me that a potential for abuse by moderators existed.
I never claimed I got a warning. Sure, I was deliberately vague in refering to a “warning line”, but I was curious as to why Marley23 felt it neccessary to edit out a full seven minutes later and fully expected he would clear it up. For some reason, and I haven’t got a clue why, you and he want to cover that up.
Given that I know what I saw and given that you say you have the ability to refer back to posts before editing, I can conclude nothing else but that you lie.
Trust me, in my mind that is the vilest accusation that can be made on this message board.
