GadareneThe reason you haven’t gotten a response to this is there is no context, which Ed specifically said was crucial to the process. Posting a bunch of oneliners out of context will never amount to a useful interpretation of the rule, and is pointless Rules Lawyering.
And yet Dex can say categorically and devoid of context that “You’re stupid” is okay and “You’re a cunt” is not okay? 
What the fuck? Rules Lawyer this, dude.
No, the reason I haven’t gotten a response is that there’s no principled way to distinguish “you’re stupid” from “you’re a cunt” without placing a line somewhere in the list I’ve provided (and I’d add “you’re stupid and ugly” to it as well, because it combines an insult to the poster’s intelligence, which is apparently okay, with a mild personal epithet, which may or may not be). And if there’s no easy way to place a line somewhere in that list, then the distinction is meaningless, and the rule is rubbish.
Also, I think people need to chill out a bit about being auto-banned. Is there any indication this will happen? I know I’ve gotten a few mod-slaps but I like to think I’m still here because it’s not a regular pattern and I don’t have “ban-soonest” written on my forehead. At least I hope not.
I just got called a twat in CS, and it didn’t even elicit a warning. If you’re a poster in good standing I don’t think Ed is going to get drunk one night and go on a banning rampage without prior warnings. ::knocks on wood::
Gadarene, to add to HoboStew’s comments, I simply don’t believe that this is that difficult.
I think there is a vested interest in making this look as capricious and confusing as possible; all in an effort to derail it.
I think Ed, Dex and the rest have, and will in the future, make this as understandable as possible and as simple as possible.
For now, this mass confusion looks like a tedious, juvenile tactic.
I am very tempted, [following the lead of Chevy Chase and Richard Pryor](http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f02d0b8cca/word-association-from-nino\), to ask people just this question when they’re behaving in a profoundly idiotic way. Or have you beaten me to the punch?
Daniel
If context and refined judgement are involved, then the new policies cannot be clear. Which is fine for etiquette, but not for rules or policies. For those who don’t understand the difference, breaking etiquette will get you ignored, while breaking rules will get you banned.
How about this? We can write whatever words we want, provided we end them with the appropriate emoticon.
GO fuck yourself you cunt! 
would be allowed as good humored joshing but
GO fuck yourself you cunt! :mad:
would be considered abusive
Perhaps the abusive content can also be tempered with weasel words:
Were I not as mindful as I am of your feelings, I might be saying “GO fuck yourself you cunt!” right now, but instead I shall just say that I disagree with your viewpoint but respect your basic humanity.
Actually, I agree with this entirely. It is, in fact, the basis for my disagreement with the new rules.
The only one I have an issue with is rule #2, the others are fine. I’m an adult, I can take it if you want to call me names. I don’t need or want someone holding my hand protecting me from the “bad people” of the Pit. If you can’t take being called a cunt, asshole, or being told to fuck off…well fuck off and go back to Candyland, you pussy. I want my Pit back, you bastards.
Really, I tend to think that at this point you’ve lost whatever moral high ground you had in claiming to desire civility. I would say that resorting to the easy analogy of children as you have done so not so few times in this thread betrays neither creativity nor civility on your part.
“As per your conduct in this thread, sir, I direct you to Gadarene’s Question.”
How can this be so clear to me and so opaque to so many others? And please can we all drop this canard of “OMG if I say fuck I will get summarily banned immediately oh noes!” Ain’t happening, Ed specifically said it ain’t happening. You will be informed that a post is in violation of the new rules and asked to stop. I will be shocked if anyone gets banned within the first 3 months of this rule.
Just coming in to add my negative opinion. Not that I’ve posted in, or even read the Pit anytime recently, but rule 2 is a completely retarded load of dumbass shit.
The problem isn’t that you want to clean up the pit - or rather that’s a problem for a lot of people, but it’s not the problem I have with the rule. (Though, since I can still call AT&T goatfelchers, it’s a spectacularly inneffective way of cleaning up the pit too.)
The problem is that “you can insult, but not abuse. You can insult people if you’re funny, but if the mod doesn’t happen to laugh, prepare for litigation” isn’t a rule. It can’t possibly be obeyed by anybody who isn’t reading the minds of all the mods at once.
It’s an open licence for mods to take potshots at posters, in crytic and unpredictable ways, and nothing more. And it’s going to make every other forum a worse place, too. Instead of “I’ve taken you to the pit”, we’ll have “I’m going to burn you right here.”
raindog:
Glad to hear it, champ. Take a shot at answering my question, then.
Revenant Threshold:
This would be awesome. 
This.
Thank you, sincerely, for making my point far better than I did.
Dex, Ed…read that.
I think I could get on board with this. If for no other reason that I am sick of whiners whining about the whiners. All wide eyed and shit, “What is the big deeeaaallll??? If you can’t call someone a cuuunntttt in the piiiitttt maybe it is about time you admit that you are inmatuuuureee” Jesus christ, shut the fuck up with that. “I don’t geeetttt it? What is all the fuss about? I have neeever needed to call someone a cunt in the piiiit” Yeah, me either, and so what? That is not the point. The point is that the SDMB has its own style and its own vibe, and the Pit was a part of that. It is irritating to see that go without good reason.
People that pretend that cursing in the pit is a sign of immaturity are the same idiots that think profanity in general is a sign of ‘limited vocabulary’. Then Obama, the patron saint of eloquence and articulation drops an F bomb and shuts up the whole lot of the nasal voiced whiney ass morons.
I don’t believe I have any moral high ground, and that’s not my intent.
If it’s “easy” to draw the children analogy it’s only because we have a few hundred childish posts in this thread. Ed and Dex have gone out of their way to outline a rather benign policy change. It doesn’t defang anyone, it doesn’t keep anyone from expressing themselves in strong terms.
I don’t have the inclination to cite the post but Ed’s last post was a picture of reason and accommodation. The Pit still has great potential for flaming and for raucous behavior.
He drew one bright line on senseless, witless, abusive name calling. Since then (and before then) we’ve had more inane outrageous claims, and silly plans like group bannings.
The new rules don’t require civility as much as they ban abuse. There is a huge chasm between the two. I have not, and would not even if this was the “old” Pit, abuse someone. But there is nothing in the old or new rules keeping me from saying that a poster----or group of posters—are acting like spoiled children.
But it my view this thread is the absolute worst demonstration of SDMB; a group having a temper tantrum because they are no longer allowed to call each other “chunts.”
This ain’t the march from Selma. It’s time for this board to grow up.
Well, I believe that’s where we differ. As i’ve said before, I greatly consider actual attempts at accurate castigation to be more abusive than simple swearing and the like; especially in cases where a person has already made their position clear, yet elects to continue to utilise those insulting terms because - well, i’m not entirely sure why you feel it necessary to point out how much you dislike the childishness of people in so many adjectives in so many of your posts, but I don’t think I can ascribe it to any positive motivation.
Methinks you should be taking your own advice. After all, what does a child do, but stubbournly repeat the same insult over and over at every chance they get?
If the question hasn’t changed, should my answer?
By now the remaining mods are probably prone in darkened rooms, clutching bottles of aspirin and their favorite tipple.*
Good call on avoiding this clusterfuck, Giraffe.
- Yes, I know one should never slug down aspirin with booze.
If your answer hasn’t changed, there’s no need to repeat it. “I’ve made my views clear already”, “I’ve answered this in post X”, or even a simple “I don’t think the sort of behaviour i’ve mentioned is appropriate”. And even then, it’s hardly necessary to have strings of unpleasant adjectives lodged into every post. Look, i’ve managed to answer your questions so far without streams of insults and nasty analogies in my every post. Was it really necessary to call for posters to “grow up” in your last post, when you have already exhorted people to “put up or shut up” and exhorted people to act civilly? Was it required for you to refer to this thread as a temper tantrum? We already know you hold all of these opinions, and they don’t add to your answer anything beyond rhetoric.
I have an idea. Instead of complaining about vague rules here and posting lists of nuanced insults to try to reverse engineer the rule 2 algorithm, lets all try this:
Post stuff in the pit. Gadarene, you can start several pit threads with all sorts of permutations that you wish to elucidate, complete with context. This way the effects of the new rule will be very clear for everyone.
Sure makes a lot more sense than the endless handwringing and doomsaying in this thread, no?