You might want to review your posts for coherence before hitting “Submit.” If the Free World was trying to rape Communism, that does not speak well of (your idea of) the Free World.
That said.
[QUOTE=Grey]
Like living over a meth lab.
[/QUOTE]
Do not hurl personal insults at posters outside The BBQ Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t take this as a personal insult, but rather a difference between Canadian and American views, which is consistent with the purpose of this thread.
So, perhaps not the most flattering statement towards Americans in general, but given that context, I didn’t interpret it as a personal insult aimed at a poster on the board. Rather, a Canadian using Williams’ comment to highlight differences between the two countries.
I found it confusing, not knowing the quote; my best guess was something like, “Posting around here is like living over a meth lab, what with all the insane junkie-style rants you hear around these parts.” I had no idea how Robin Williams entered into it.
Knowing the quote’s origin makes it much clearer what you meant :).
I thought, assuming you knew the reference, it was an obvious comment on the incoherence of the quoted post. An incoherence that Tom himself comments on. Doesn’t bother me much one way or the other but I appreciate Northern Piper bringing it here for some clarity.
Yes, I took the reference as highlighting the different approaches to taking in Muslim refugees from Syria, which was raised in the Economist article I quoted, and the response from DerekMichaels00 on that issue.
I won’t speak for Tom, but I’d certainly look askance at it.
This pops up from time to time. Someone drops a quote that they think is an obvious reference to something and others don’t get it or recognize it and report it. The moderator acts and boom! Kerfluffle occurs.
Remember, this is text. It’s very easy to have your words misconstrued or to hurt others when something you think is obvious really isn’t. Always best to try to make your intent as plain as possible.
That said, it was a note. Tom didn’t issue a warning for it. So no harm, no foul, IMHO and perhaps this discussion will do us all good.
I don’t get why it being a Robin Williams quote makes any difference. The quote was chosen for a reason, i.e. that post makes you think of the meth lab joke. If Grey had instead said “never go full retard” would he not be making an insult? Don’t worry it’s just a quote from Tropic Thunder?
I suppose you could go that way, but the phrase was directed at the post and the post isn’t the poster.
Now had I said you post like a meth user, that would be personal. If I say your post is like a meth lab I’m not saying you the poster is a meth lab (or user for that matter).
My post was ambiguous enough, I guess, to get the note - live and learn.
It’s not that it’s a quote that makes it non-insulting: it’s that the quote is a comparison between two countries, Canada and the US. It was part of the conversation in the thread: I posted the quote from the Economist, praising Canada for taking in more Syrian refugees than the US, even given the difference in our population sizes; DerekMichaels00 responded with a very critical comment about Muslim Syrian refugees, a perspective we’ve seen a lot of from some USians recently (Skittles, anyone? ); Grey responded with the Williams quote as a reference about the difference between the two countries.
I didn’t see it as an insult, but rather a comment on a political difference between Canada and the US, as developed in the posts in that thread.
Just because it’s a quote, famous or otherwise, doesn’t automatically make it not a personal insult.
Robin Williams make the quote as a general observation about the two countries. In the post it was used without context as a reply to another poster therefore it was not written as a general observation but as a direct response. What matters is what’s written not what’s in the posters head.
Even with knowledge of the original quote I could interpret the post as either insulting to the poster or commenting on perceived American attitudes or both. In this case I don’t see a problem with a note. The poster could have written the post a little better to make his intentions clear.
It appears to be context-specific then, based on one’s own familiarity with the quote. The Canadian posters here seem to be more familiar with the quote and saw it as a comment on differences between the two countries; those not familiar with the context of the quote seem to have seen it as an insult.
Point taken, but to me, it’s indicative of a wider phenomenon that I’ve seen lately on the boards:
Poster A says something that is idiotic, jerkish and downright nasty.
Poster B says something that may possibly, if you look sideways, be taken the wrong way.
Poster B gets a warning. "Oh, poster B could have written the post a little better to make his intentions clear. "
Give me a freakin’ break. In many instances, the warning might as well be given for simply responding to an asshole troll.
); Grey responded with the Williams quote as a reference about the difference between the two countries.