Also, if you’re seeing animal abuse and mass shootings on Craigslist, you may be doing it wrong.
Yes there’s a significant difference. A decent poster can make a lapse in judgment and post like a jerk. That doesn’t make that person a jerk. So I don’t see criticism of a single action as an insult.
Grammatical structures are important, because changing the structure of a statement can change the meaning and to me your example is doing that.
Well, these comments fit the grammatical pattern that you think is the deciding factor:
That’s the comment of a jerk
That’s the kind of thing only a jerk would say
You really think those are okay, on the basis that technically they are criticizing the specific post rather than the poster? And because they only imply that the poster is a jerk right now for making this particular comment, leaving open the possibility that he might change his ways?
No. You’re missing my point. You are conflating labeling behavior with labeling a person.
Let’s put it this way… Justin Trudeau (Canada’s Prime Minister) is embroiled in a scandal because an 18-year-old picture of him surfaced showing him wearing blackface at a party. A couple of other instances of him wearing blackface around that time have come out. Trudeau has acknowledged the incidents and apologized.
I feel that wearing blackface is racially insensitive and is the behavior of a racist. And I find it shameful that it occurred. But at the same time, I don’t believe Trudeau himself is a racist based on his statements and actions in office. (I’m sure others may disagree with me.)
Going back to your hypothetical situation, I could say these things:
- Trudeau is a racist.
- Trudeau is a racist for wearing blackface.
- Trudeau wearing blackface was racist behavior.
I only believe that the 3rd thing is true. I don’t believe his behavior at that time was intended to be racist, and he was clueless about how inappropriate it was, but it was still something a racist would do.
I’m hoping that example is clear enough. If not, I’m really not sure what else I can say, and we may just have to agree to disagree (which I am happy to do without rancor). 
Nice rhetorical judo! 
I do get your point, but board policy is not framed as labeling behavior vs labeling the person. Labeling behavior is still attacking the poster - “you’re acting like a jerk” vs “you are a jerk”.
Board policy is framed with the stronger distinction that you should attack the [content of the] post, not the poster.
In my opinion, all of the following are attacking the poster and should be disallowed:
You are a jerk.
You are a jerk for posting that.
You’re acting like a jerk.
That’s the kind of post a jerk would write.
That post is jerkish.
All are semantically synonymous, all are attacking the poster’s character. Just changing the grammatical form so that “jerkish” is an adjective doesn’t transform it into a substantive comment on the content of the post. As an adjective “jerkish” just means “something a jerk would do” - so it’s still calling the poster a jerk, but doing it implicitly, which is no better than calling the poster a jerk explicitly. All are attacking the character of the poster, not the content of the post.
If you want to get away from attacking the poster, I think you need to address the content of the post in a substantive way, pointing out why it’s a problem - change the semantics, not just the syntax. Get rid of any form of the word “jerk” altogether. This would be an example of attacking the post:
That trite dismissive attempt at humor trivializes a heartfelt OP from someone who’s been through a traumatic experience.
Leave it to the reader to infer that the poster is a jerk; and, if you wish, report the jerkish behavior to a Mod.
ETA: I don’t think your discussion of Trudeau’s racism is an apt parallel to the discussion around the word jerk. Words or actions can be racist without the person being a racist, so using that adjective is not necessarily attacking the person. Use of the adjective racist can amount to substantive criticism of someone’s words or actions, and may satisfy the “attack the post” dictum.
But words or actions can’t be jerks, only people can.
Correct. And words or actions can’t be racists either.
Labeling behavior is labeling a post, because what other kind of behavior can you have on a message board? Pretty much all I can do on this board is read things, leave posts, or send private messages (which are just another type of post). All behavior is a post by definition. So there’s no difference between the two.
Again, I can say “that is a mean thing to post” which isn’t an insult, or “you are a mean person” which is. Or let’s contrast saying “what you wrote is inaccurate” which is not an insult (and may even be an attempt to help point out a simple typo) or saying “you never post anything accurate” which is calling someone stupid, sloppy, or dishonest, any of which are insulting.
I just feel like we’re both going in circles though and we’ve covered this before, and I think I might respectfully bow out with no ill will here.
I can only say I didn’t want to write a dissertation that was longer than the post in question. I only wanted to point out to him that I thought it was insensitive and ill-thought-out (and I still do, even after his walk-back earlier in this thread). I wanted to do it in a snappy way, which was my undoing. I didn’t want to be tedious, I wanted to get his attention.
Frankly, to me, you seem to be attempting to interpret for everyone this rule:
in a way that (dare I say it?) should be left to the mods and/or the admin.
I wasn’t addressing your post specifically. I thought your original question was already answered officially by a mod, and I was stating my opinion on a more general modding issue that came up organically. Perhaps it would have been better to start a new thread, but I think the discussion has run its course anyway.
I’ve always thought the junior modding rule was kind of stupid. We should kind of self-police our environment. But I also see where some people can kind of take it too far and develop a sort of message board vigilantism.
Have been a mod, am not one now, but FWIW here’s my $.02.
Telling someone to try harder at not being a jerk can come across pretty close to directly calling them a jerk. So I do agree a line was crossed there, but I don’t personally see it as junior modding. It was something else, though I’m not 100% sure what.
Anyway, welcome to the boards. I’m always happy to hear more tales from the big city.