Pit rules have been revised

About This Message Board
281

An example. Not my finest moment, but an example.

There was a thread a few years ago in which we discussed a homophobic kid who came to school on a Day of Silence wearing a homemade T-shirt full of Bible verses condemning homosexuality. It was a good, meaty thread, revolving around one of the most basic questions of our society: how do we balance folks’ right to feel safe against folks’ rights to express their sincerely-held philosophical beliefs? I came down, reluctantly, on the homophobe’s side, concluding that much as I hated what he said, his right to expression trumped the right of gay students not to feel threatened by his shirt. (It was a little more complicated than that; do a search if you’re interested).

Anyway, another poster responded to my posts by suggesting I was homophobic myself, accusing me of something that really, really pissed me off. He continued to do it, hijacking the thread to engage in ad hominems that added nothing to the discussion and pushing my buttons like nobody’s business.

I didn’t want to respond to him there. But I was pissed. So I started a simple thread, called “Fuck you, PosterX.”

That’s basically what it took for me to vent; after doing that, I was calm enough to post in the thread addressing the interesting issues therein.

I didn’t have the energy nor the desire (nor, quite possibly, the talent) to craft a beautifully vitriolic missive to him. I just wanted to vent, to say fuck you to him for being such a venomous dumb asshole.

I appreciated the board’s allowing me to do so. I don’t appreciate having this taken away.

Please consider redrafting that rule. If I’m prevented from telling someone that I hope their father contracts cancer, or if I’m prevented from telling someone I fucked their dog, or if I’m prevented from telling someone that their baby is ugly and obviously is the product of their wife’s relationship with a syphilitic otyugh, that’s cool. Limit the extra-nasty personal attacks; eliminate clear and sincere wishes of unpleasantness to another poster. But limiting common idioms of irritation and anger? That’s unwise, it doesn’t address the problem of over-venomous posts, and it’s not what folks want.

Go back to the boxing-rules analogy. Fuck You is a basic punch, as is Go to Hell, Fuck Off, Kiss My Ass, etc. Boxing protocol eliminates groin shots and other unfair strategies: those are the ones where you get personal and play dirty.

Your current rule seems to ENCOURAGE creative dirty play, by eliminating the basic shots of hostility. I think you need to go in the opposite direction. If you need to get rid of the venom, let folks know that overly personal attacks that hit below the belt, so to speak, are verboten.

Daniel

  • I’ll be the first to admit I’ve made these myself; I’m not proud of it, and I’m trying to stop doing it.
282

Out of control? Since when? The Pit as of yesterday was already a model of decorum compared to a few years ago. Frankly, it was a heck of a lot less scary than GD, which I won’t touch with a ten foot pole. Thems dudes are CRAZY.

283

Jeesum Crow, Indistinguishable, I posted that link in a Pit thread this morning! Of course, I’ve probably now broken some rule by comparing some pedants on this board to Nazis. Although, I agree with Hitler on this one…

Seriously, this rule about insult/abuse is unworkable. I also have problems with some of the other rules, but at least you can administer them fairly. Now we’ll have even more trying-to-be-clever posts in the Pit that fall completely flat, with more and more people trying to not get in trouble by making the mods laugh. No one wants that.

284

Best as I can tell from the many “Members” that are very familiar to me----and who now have the word “Guest” under them----- it looks like many of them were quite content to let someone else pay the rent.

In my view it strengthens the community. You’re stepping up your game for the community. levdrakon is right—there are no shortages of MBs if you want high school caliber exchanges. Unfortunately, that is exactly what The Pit looks like most days.

My hope would be that a very small percentage of the posters----the most juvenile and immature, and who made the most noise—might leave. Others will still have the freedom to call a pinhead a pinhead----sans the high school bile— and will elevate the quality of discourse.

A larger group would either join, or existing members would be willing to join Pit discussions (and assume the risk of being called a pinhead) without the inevitable “C*nt!” being hurled in short order.

Listen, in my view it’s time to live out the “Fighting Ignorance” creed. There’s nothing creative, witty, or redeeming in shrieking "cnt!"* at someone.

For all the glad handing about how smart and witty and creative we are it’s ironic there are so many complaints about a rule that will make us look less stupid, less banal, less clumsy, less juvenile.

If we are that creative, this rule means it’s time to put up, or shut up.

285

Maybe Ed is giving the Pit up for Lent?

I did. And apparently, the only reason you give a shit, is because managment does. So what do you want, a medal?

I stand by what I said.

286

You don’t get it. At all. People can still call the Fox News lady a cunt, tell some politician to shove a rust railroad spike up his ass and encourage Jack Chick to fuck himself sideways–all the things you say you hate. Just not to other posters. You won’t see the higher tone you’d like to see; the vituperation will merely get shifted to different targets.

So sorry.

287

Totally unfair. When the board stopped being pay-to-post, it was made thoroughly clear that ad revenues for nonpayers would offset their membership fee, and that people should choose the option that worked for them. Acting as though they’re freeloaders is equivalent to acting as though folks without cable who watch broadcast TV are freeloaders. It’s nonsense and a low blow.

After the first part of your post, you’re not in a position to wave the “fighting ignorance” flag. But just so we’re clear, there’s nothing ignorant about shrieking “cunt” at someone, either. Profanity is a subset of our language that serves a particular purpose. It shouldn’t be the only tool someone relies on, but it need not be removed from the toolkit.

288

Censorship and fighting ignorance are mutually exclusive.

289

Thanks for your concern.

My biggest irritant was the vituperation shown to other posters. My opinion is simply one of many—and I’m hardly representative of the average Doper.

You want to call the Fox News lady a c*nt? Have at it. I think it’s banal, juvenile and makes you look less than intelligent, but who am I?

But if I’m having a disagreement with you in GD, I am not interested in going over to The Pit so you can call me a c*nt. (or have to read you calling someone else one)

Given that the majority of interactions are interactions directly between Dopers, it is inconceivable that it won’t produce a “higher tone.”

290

I’m guessing you’ve never been to a… you know… school. With a teacher?

Conducting the discourse is not censorship.

291

Seriously, where are all these threads with people shrieking “cunt” at each other, anyway? Where are they? Am I looking at the wrong Pit? Because the one I’m looking at, the first identifiable poster pitting has devolved into a Rick appreciation thread, the second is now a pretty civil discussion of vaccination policy (complete with cites), the third appears to have lapsed into a light-hearted discussion of the value of the halting problem in computer science, and the fourth is a pitting of samclem which would not exist under the rule that absolutely nobody has a problem with.

That’s all the direct poster abuse I can find on the front page of the Pit. In the middle of all that, Lynn found it necessary to warn someone for using the word “ignore” (not discussing the ignore function), but otherwise the sky failed to cave in. Anyone trying to get away with the lazy style of posting being described is invariably shut up by mass mockery from everyone else, so why the futile attempt to legislate away something that barely happens anyway? What problem, exactly, were we trying to solve? That our community is worryingly self-regulating?

292

Neither you or I could count the ways that we receive information in our day to day lives, including discourse that produces an interchange, that are extremely effective and don’t rely on rank profanity to convey an idea.

This doesn’t begin to be a “censorship” issue. Surely you’re kidding.

293

My God. This post encapsulates every single thing I love about the SDMB. I’m serious (and cracking up)

So even though I think these new rules lick cysts, I’m probably going to wind up sticking around. I think a lot of people will.

294

I’m not interested in going to the Pit to be called a cunt either but if someone does it, I’m not getting all butthurt over it. It’s just the nature of the forum; if someone needs to blow off a little steam and letting them curse me up, down and sideways keeps them from kicking a kitten then I’m all for it. But, of course, I’m not a pantywaist with a tissue-paper skin.

295

And what exactly is so wrong with this? Take me for example. Just this month I pitted Data Robotics for making a product that destroyed my data. Under the new rules, “Fuck Drobo” would be acceptable. If a poster disagreed with me, I could not call him/her a cunt. Why is this such a bad thing? It seems very similar to the rules in Cafe Society - you can insult a performer or work of art or whatever, but not a poster who created such works. I don’t see a problem with that.

You may have read the words but you clearly failed the comprehension portion of the test. I have used the pit (started a thread there just this month in fact). I like this board. I like TPTB here. I want to support their efforts. When they make a decision that sounds somewhat reasonable (although IMO difficult to enforce but hey, that’s their job so if they want it fine by me) and everyone starts screaming about the end of the world I feel compelled to argue the contrary.

And yes, I would like a medal.

296

Damn it, I can never find my knife when I need it.

297

I take issue with the first part of this point. Yes, i’d agree, adhering to a higher level of civility can strengthen a community - but not if it’s forced. It has to be willing. That’s the whole point of civility; it shows a level of respectfulness to particular people or the community at large. Enforcing this new take skips the important part to get the results; the important part is the respect, willingly given, the effort, willingly donated. You can’t force someone to have respect, and forcing people to act as though they do is just going to make them yet more annoyed. And the community is never strengthened when people are pretending to be what they aren’t.

Civility is nothing without respect behind it. It’s just empty words. And you can’t force respect.

298

and incorrect, witness great #'s of charter members that are pissed off.

299

In my seven years here, I’ve pitted a fellow Doper exactly once. Despite this, thinking back to that one experience, without that outlet I might have left the Board. Sometimes it’s that necessary to tell a person that they’re being an asshole.

This rule change is spectacularly dumb.

300

The only flag I’m waving is the flag of opinion.

It is my opinion----and life experience— that the most common practitioners of this “subset” were often the dumbest.

That’s not to say that all profanity is the tool of the dullard. But profanity isn’t simply a tool in the tool kit of many in The Pit, it’s the only tool they have, *or it appears that way. *

I think the new rule will force them to use tools that, to date, have seen little use. H.L Mencken would be proud.