Protesting a warning

As for this, it’s not an insult if it’s true.

WTF? Yes, it can be. If someone is morbidly obese and I call them a fat pig, it’s still an insult. Even if I just call them fat.

If someone is stupider than average, calling them a moron is still an insult.

Nope. As a morbidly obese person, I’ve used that example in real life. It’s impolite to call me fat, but not insulting. The “pig” part is different, as that’s a comparison to an animal widely considered dirty, and is deliberately insulting, and (obviously) not factual.

Just because you aren’t insulted doesn’t mean it’s not an insult.

Let me just say, the staff disagrees with you and now you know better.
Please avoid insults outside of the pit in the future.

Correct, that it’s a fact means it’s not an insult.

Can you make in clear in the rules that telling the truth is prohibited if it upsets someone? Or, if it already is, point me to where it’s stated.

No need, you’re the only one that seems to have a problem with this.

Also, as you were speculating about another poster, hard to claim what you’re claiming.

Ha ha, no I’m not, I linked a few posts ago to a thread where Martin Hyde says exactly the same thing I did. But I guess facts don’t matter to the staff here any more than they do to most of the posters.

a) don’t insult other posters
b) This is not a truth, it is an opinion or conjecture.

c) you got one warning, learn from it and move on.

Martin accused another poster of having an “emotional problem”, which is a personal attack. The warning was deserved.

nm, wrong thread

By that logic, calling me a “faggot” isn’t an insult. I am, after all, a man who is sexually attracted to other men, so that’s just a statement of fact.

It’s also amusing to consider how, if we adopted your approach to insults, we would moderate someone calling another poster “stupid.” Do you really want the staff here deciding whether or not it’s okay to call you an idiot, based on how much we agree with whatever position you’re currently advocating?

Nope, “faggot” is a slur. “Stupid” is a value judgement. Calling someone “gay” or “queer”, or “ignorant” should be fine if they’re true. And I say this as someone who’s queer, and certainly ignorant about many things.

I don’t accept that “emotional” is a slur, “fat” is a slur, and so on - I think they are descriptors that can be used if they are true.

“Emotional” isn’t a value judgement?

No, it’s an observation that someone is making their judgements based on emotion rather than reason. In the threads that spawned the warnings mentioned in this thread, me and Martin Hyde observed that people who clearly stated that they had emotional reasons for what they thought should happen at trials, or what the law should be, and commented on it.

That I think they are wronf for being emotional about it is a value judgement, but believing and saying that someone is wrong isn’t against the rules here - in fact, it’s necessary for a discussion forum.

Then calling someone “stupid” is merely making an observation that someone’s ability to think critically about issues is impaired.

I wonder if this is a generational thing. But to Miller’s point, you could mod “stupid” as a pejorative when used as one.

The use of racial epithets, pejoratives, slurs, and other similar items is forbidden. Hate speech as a whole, however, can be defined broadly or narrowly depending on the context of any individual thread. The definition of context is entirely at the discretion of the moderation staff.


I’d disagree, I don’t actually think that’s what “stupid” means. But if that is how you define it, it should be fine to use here.

This is an overriding rule spelled out for GD and P&E:

So don’t attack the poster.