I do not buy the argument that insults, creative or otherwise, are necessarily more civil than a typical comment like “fuck you”. They are just less profane. You can be aggressive and hurtful even without using profanity or when crafting a response that might make a moderator laugh.
So even if we buy the argument that civility is a worthy goal (in the one forum which, by design, is meant for uncivil behavior), this rule won’t get us there.
Well said.
I don’t know what you guys are worried about. The combination of rules suggests an obvious solution:
“I hope you post that on [a board where people can tell you to fuck off] and the posters there tell you to fuck off!”
I was going to answer your question, but you went ahead and did it yourself. 
We have lots of other forums for not being rude in. We have precisely one whose (former) explicit purpose was that when we were pissed off with each other, we could hash it out in there. Now it’s just a forum for whinging about external shit that vexes us. Which might be fine, but it serves no better purpose than a million livejournals; it’s just got more than two people reading it.
Some people clearly don’t believe it’s of value to have somewhere to hash out irritable disputes on a messageboard, and that this function can be easily dispensed with. They’re completely wrong.
[citation needed]
You don’t need to cite your opinion. But if you expect it to be taken seriously–if it’s worth posting to communicate to others–surely you can give a single example of someone in the Pit who posts in a way that makes it appear that profanity is the only tool in their kit.
Daniel
I have to remind myself when I see sentiments like this------which strike me as “we can’t help ourselves” (or “they can’t help themselves”)-----that we are still in real life; real people with real online personalities (if not real life names) and track records and opinions and positions—and feelings.
But no where else in real life would you consider calling someone a “c*nt” or a host of other filthy names simply because you didn’t like what they had to say.
We go to work, to the gym, dry cleaners, home to our kids and spouses, to work, to see our friends, and overwhelmingly display some measure of self control.
Yet I see nothing in the dynamics of a message board that validates the mindset that says here I can’t control myself and need the equivalent of an adult time out room where I can go kick the walls and scream.
I know that places like this—and the anonymity that comes with it----are the perfect place to blow off some steam and perhaps act out a little more than I could in the break room at work. I understand that.
But at the end of the day we still purport to be a community. This still is real life. And shrieking filthy names at each other is hardly conducive to community.
Maybe they’re trying to sell to Disney.
I believe that’s chapter two of ‘How To Lose Friends and Make People Hate You.’
They may be civil, but I doubt that means anyone’s actually listening.
It would if Firefox didn’t have Adblock Plus.
Aw hell. Now I’m even agreeing with Dorkness.
Never been at the brewpub with my friends and me, have you?
And sometimes, I hit the mute button on the conference call and let out a stream that would put a smile on George Carlin’s face.
The Pit is kind of like that mute button. Well, it was. Until Rule 2 showed up.
In a community there’s a place for calling someone a cunt. That might be the bar, the inside of your car, the bathroom, the mute button on the phone, out at lunch with your friends, in the parking lot, or until today in the BBQ Pit.
You can say that there’s a time and a place for everything, and I’d agree with you. The BBQ Pit was set up to be that time and place. If you didn’t want to participate, you didn’t have to go there. No reason to take it away from those of us who were happy to have our little space where the gloves come off, man. What’s it to you? Why’s it so important to you that it be taken away?
I would never call somebody a cunt just because I don’t like what they have to say. I will however call them a cunt if they are one. Here, or anywhere else.
Further, we are a community. That’s true. I can think of several people this community would be better off without. Why should I not Pit them and abuse them?
Of course, the subjective nature of my cite would render it invalid to some at least. (as would yours) Still, I’m flabbergasted by the request.
From where I sit-----while there are many witty and funny, and profane comments in The Pit----the vast, vast majority of them are profane for the sake of being profane. All too often they are banal, witless and abusive.
From time to time The Pit produces a gem of a thread, or series of exchanges. But most often it’s the high school parking lot all over again.
Of course, that’s simply my opinion.
Wanna bet? I would, I can and I have. Not that I’m proud of it, mind you, but I felt at those times that it was deserved.
Wow. I thought supplying one woud be hard. But if it’s the vast, vast majority, please supply several cites.
And just so, in the other fora people exhibit plenty of control. But I’ll be damned if I go to my local bar, or my friend’s house and they tell me not to say “Fuck you” to the asshole who just ran into me, grabbed my tit and spilled my beer.
Work, the gym, etc. are not appropriate places for that kind of language but the pit WAS SPECIFICALLY CREATED so that posters could blow off steam.
And for the record, I tend to call a cunt a cunt in real life when the word fits.
A message board is not the same as real life interaction. Ignoring that fact won’t change it, and trying to deal with message board interactions as if they’re real life interactions ultimately won’t work.
People are going to say mean, petty things on the internet regardless of whether you force them to use civil language or not. With enough bannings and enforcement, you can force people to behave civilly. But it’s much harder to force them to behave decently. And people generally don’t behave decently on the internet. There just aren’t enough consequences. People will say things on the internet they wouldn’t dare say in person, things that are “civil”, in perfectly polite language, which are nevertheless mean, vicious, spiteful, condescending, dismissive, arrogant, bullying, and just plain out-and-out hurtful.
If you force people to be civil on the internet, all you’re going to get are civil assholes that you can’t respond to appropriately. In real life, often such people are at least intimidated enough by the possibility of reprisal that they’ll play nice but on the internet that’s not an option. On the internet, sometimes the only available, appropriate response to civil, indecent behaviour is an uncivil one, because sometimes nothing else will clue the assholes in to the fact that they’re crossing a line. That’s the difference between a message board and the gym, your dry cleaners, what have you.
No, it doesn’t seem “conducive to community”. But a lack of naughty words alone does not a community make. A community involves standards of behaviour which encompass a hell of a lot more than civil language. Focusing on stamping out invective just lets other kinds of dick behaviour through.
So if you weren’t proud of it, why should we be embracing it?
And I think you’ve hit on a central point: whether there is ever a case where calling someone a “c*unt” is deserved.
I don’t subscribe to that mindset.
Wow is right.
The first time someone used the term “well crafted invective” I started a response that had as every word, period, comma etc a hyperlink to a Pit post that was remarkable for just how unremarkable they were—petty, juvenile profanity laden drivel.
About 15 minutes in it occurred to me that it would take hours to finish the post so i gave up.
But I can tell you that I could have written War and Peace and not run out of hyperlinks.
I don’t go around calling people cunts willy-nilly, but sometimes a cunt is a cunt and I want the freedom to able to call it should the mood strike me.
The distinction being drawn between crude insults and witty put-downs is entirely in the eyes of the beholder, and as such a rule forbidding one but not the other is utterly impossible to follow as a poster. This rule change is extremely ill-advised.
I’ve read the complaints and arguments. And while I completely understand both the complaints and their reasonings… I just can’t understand why it’s aroused so much passion and anger. It’s just some kind of mental stumbling block, I guess. I understand why people are upset - just not why they’re THIS upset.
Maybe I’ll come around as the discussion develops. Maybe not. We’ll see.
I really have to wonder what version of the Pit you’ve been reading. :dubious:
The threads I’ve followed/participated in this past week have been:
Rick’s thread, where Bijou’s ignorance really didn’t deserve anything complicated past a quick smackdown from everyone, and turned into a Rick appreciation thread very quickly. It’s basically been a party since the first twenty posts or so.
The vaccine thread, which has lots and lots and lots of cites flying back and forth, and once in awhile an “idiot!”.
“Who are you wearing”, which didn’t even pause at vitriol before becoming a party/IMHO thread.
The pendants thread, which has been a lot of mild complaining at various people while being pendantic back and forth at each other.
The Christianity and science thread, which became a far too technical of a discussion for me to follow or participate in after just a few posts. Facinating reading, though.
The Giraffe and fluiddruid quitting threads, which were pretty much completely appreciation threads.
The Obama sign thread, which has the standard political mudslinging back and forth, but the only thing actually in disagreement is how much of an overreaction by the cop it was and whether Bricker’s attempt at “gotcha!” backfired on him.
A discussion about a woman with daily seizures who is still driving, in which all agreed she was an idiot and should be reported to the police.
The stimulus bill cartoon thread, which was a back and forth between the people seeing racism and those that don’t.
The daycare thread, which turned into a debate about the relative dangers of peanut allergies.
A debate about whether or not Surreal’s GQ Scots-Irish thread was ignorant and/or racist or not.
…that’s even more than I thought when I started the list, and nary a profanity-laden screed with no redeeming value to be found. Frankly, those were most of the good discussions I’ve had on the board this week.
Well, that’s what the judge decided in From The Hip…