# Should "Liar" Be Permissible In GD? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 13, 2007, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867 "2007-12-13T15:28:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2007, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/141 "2007-12-24T17:31:29Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] **Shodan** , my experience with you is that the more you try to make someone else look dishonest, the funnier it gets. Daniel [/QUOTE] [Indeed it does. šŸ˜ƒ](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8912402&postcount=62) ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2007, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/142 "2007-12-24T18:23:25Z")
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim] I think whether ā€œYou are being dishonestā€ is equivalent to ā€œYou are a liarā€ is equivalent to ā€œYou are lyingā€ is a valid question. To my mind they are all synonymous, and all unacceptable. [/QUOTE] I concur. To my ears, they all sound like personal attacks. All would tend to raise the hackles of the person at whom they are directed. None add anything of substance to a debate. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2007, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/143 "2007-12-24T19:41:21Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] **Shodan** , my experience with you is that the more you try to make someone else look dishonest, the funnier it gets. Daniel [/QUOTE] Glad to amuse you. You might want to consider the fact that you are agreeing with someone who posts the refutation of his own nonsense. Merry Christmas. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2007, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/144 "2007-12-24T20:21:55Z")
And it gets even funnier ā€¦ šŸ˜ƒ ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2007, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/145 "2007-12-24T20:55:11Z")
[QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated] And that quote right there says it all. [/QUOTE] Damn straight. [QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated] I see you now, my brother. [/QUOTE] Not your brother - thatā€™s the whole point, you Afrocentric airhead. [QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated] Iā€™ll stay out of your way and off your shit list. [/QUOTE] Yay! Xmas comes early! ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2007, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/146 "2007-12-25T01:54:14Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] This is my favorite part of your post - [Quote=tomndebb] I was encouraging everyone to ratchet back on all the hostile language that did nothing to promote the discussion. That would include opening a post with references to a ā€œsteaming pileā€ and closing it with references to persons being ā€œidiots.ā€ [/quote] Followed in the very next paragraph with > [@](#): > > your dishonest ā€œclarificationā€ is bullshit. IOW, you started the post by encouraging everyone to rachet back on doing something that you immediately proceeded to do. [/quote] Checks Forum. You are lying. The statement using ā€œratchet backā€ refers to the earlier Mod action telling everyone to cool down. It was not a statement on my activity in that post. Following that earlier Mod action, you attempted a hijack asking a spurious rhetorical question designed to pretend that you had not engaged in activity similar to that which I was telling all posters to abandon. The statement that your dishonest ā€œclarificationā€ was bullshit was not a personal attackā€“it was a Moderatorā€™s official observation regarding your behavior. > [@Shodan](#): > > And your notion that you did not ban the use of the term ā€œsteaming pileā€ is your usual semantic nonsense. You stated clearly that if I continued to object to your arbitrary imposition of rules on me that you were failing to abide by yourself, you would warn me. You donā€™t have to put on the Mod hat to be clearer than that. You may not be lying here, just incredibly self-involved and stupid. If I tell all posters to scale back the hostility and you disingenuously reply that you had done nothing hostile and was I really placing a ban on some topic that was not even involved in the thread, my quoting your explicit expressions of hostility is nothing more than demonstrating that you had engaged in the overall negative behavior. It is hardly some sort of ā€œrulingā€ that certain explicit phrases have been banned, either temporarily or permanently. I get the impression from reading your stuff that the phrase ā€œsemantic bullshitā€ is nothing more than your catchphrase for ā€œ_Fooey. I got caught saying something dumb one more time._ā€ but whatever rocks your world, guy. > [@Shodan](#): > > Thatā€™s why the clarification of whether ā€œyou are lyingā€ is necessary, and also (probably) why you have refrained from making the clarification. Actually, the only ā€œrulingā€ that has been made among three separate Moderators over the course of a few days watching the consensus build in this thread was that the statement ā€œYou are a liarā€ would no longer be given a pass in **GD**. I, personally, am not making any specific rulings on a hypothetical situation on my own. Weā€™ve been watching the thread to see whether any further clarifications are needed and what the opinions of the TM might be regarding those clarifications. = = = The declarative sentences ā€œ_Poster X is an idiot._ā€ and ā€œ_Poster X is a liar._ā€ have a nice parallel structure that makes the call fairly simple. There is no similar parallel structure to ā€œ_Poster X is lying._ā€ Is this statement an attack on the poster or on the argument put forth? I have seen both positions defended. Several posters in this thread have expressed various sentiments regarding a variety of expressions. It would be nice if everyone in **GD** simply behaved with the utmost civility at all times, but since that will not happen, we are looking for some consensus among the posters where they would like to see the lines drawn. We are not going to impose a rule hastily so that we can modify it four times before it begins to function well. If this this thread can carry on that discussion without being sidetracked by personal grudges, we may arrive at a decision sooner. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2007, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/147 "2007-12-25T15:01:02Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] The statement using ā€œratchet backā€ refers to the earlier Mod action telling everyone to cool down. [/quote] You said, very specifically, that the statement using ā€œrachet backā€ was intended to include my reference to the OP as a ā€œsteaming pileā€ and my calling John Edwards an idiot. Those were the only two examples you cited. > [@](#): > > It was not a statement on my activity in that post. Of course itā€™s not - you are exempting yourself from the rules you are setting for everyone else. Thatā€™s why it was hypocritical. > [@](#): > > Following that earlier Mod action, you attempted a hijack asking a spurious rhetorical question designed to pretend that you had not engaged in activity similar to that which I was telling all posters to abandon. Horseshit. Pure, unrefined horseshit. I said, clearly and specifically, that I **was** calling John Edwards an idiot and an economic dolt. And I asked for a clarification if the rule allowing insulting off-board groups was being revoked. > [@](#): > > The statement that your dishonest ā€œclarificationā€ was bullshit was not a personal attackā€“it was a Moderatorā€™s official observation regarding your behavior. My characterization of the OP in the thread was not a personal attack either. Yet you found it necessary to put a stop to it, for the sake of the debate. And then do the same thing, no matter the effect on the debate. > [@](#): > > If I tell all posters to scale back the hostility and you disingenuously reply that you had done nothing hostile and **was I really placing a ban on some topic that was not even involved in the thread** , my quoting your explicit expressions of hostility is nothing more than demonstrating that you had engaged in the overall negative behavior. Emphasis added. Again, your own words show that you are being other than factual. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Since it appears that we can have a productive discussion on this topic, after all, the restrictions on insulting people outside the SDMB and the restrictions on referring to ideas as poorly formed (i.e., dumb) are lifted. You state quite clearly that you had imposed a ruling on behavior about which I asked. So my request for a clarification was not at all dishonest. Merry Christmas. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2007, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/148 "2007-12-25T16:57:29Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] You said, very specifically, that the statement using ā€œrachet backā€ was intended to include my reference to the OP as a ā€œsteaming pileā€ and my calling John Edwards an idiot. Those were the only two examples you cited. [/quote] You were the only poster who whined that you had not been doing anything wrong so I only needed to cite your open hostility to demonstrate that you had displayed hostility. Try to keep up. > [@Shodan](#): > > Of course itā€™s not - you are exempting yourself from the rules you are setting for everyone else. Thatā€™s why it was hypocritical. I told others to avoid insults. I made a professional observation about your denial that you had hurled insults. Try to keep up. > [@Shodan](#): > > Horseshit. Pure, unrefined horseshit. I said, clearly and specifically, that I **was** calling John Edwards an idiot and an economic dolt. And I asked for a clarification if the rule allowing insulting off-board groups was being revoked. And you posted that red herring for the sole purpose of pretending that you were not adding to the hostility of the thread. > [@Shodan](#): > > My characterization of the OP in the thread was not a personal attack either. Yet you found it necessary to put a stop to it, for the sake of the debate. And then do the same thing, no matter the effect on the debate. I originally deliberately did not mention you or any other poster when I told everyone to ratchet back the hostility. I never singled you out and I never claimed that your particular actions were evil. I told everyone to cool off and only when you came whining in with your off-topic complaint did I point out that you had contributed to the situation. > [@Shodan](#): > > Again, your own words show that you are being other than factual. > You state quite clearly that you had imposed a ruling on behavior about which I asked. So my request for a clarification was not at all dishonest. No. You are revising history. My [initial statement](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8796978#post8796978) was > [@tomndebb](#): > > In this thread, we do not need to see any more statements regarding stupidity, lest we lead our fellow posters into intemperate responses. > Everyone remains free to express their opinion (suitably supported by citations, of course), that one view or another is in error, but the insults allegedly directed toward arguments (or directed toward non-posters representing the views of posters) are now off limits in this thread. Which is a pretty clear statement that the ā€œinsultsā€ were only limited in that particular thread (ā€œin this threadā€ is repeated twice) and that I wanted the overall hostile tone to be cooled off. [You replied](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8797214#post8797214) with the self-serving > [@Shodan](#): > > Not at all. I am not sure if **tomndebb** is warning me; if he is, I would appreciate if he would specify where I attacked a poster instead of a post. > > If **tomndebb** just means me calling John Edwards stupid and an idiot, well, I donā€™t see Edwards posting to this thread. If it is no longer permissable to call politicians names, then you are going to be rather busy in the nine thousand Bush-bashing threads from now until 2009. If it is something else, **tomndebb** , you need to be more specific. So you make a big deal about grabbing your knee and rolling around in front of the ref when the answer to your question is included in my same post you quoted. You then deliberately ignore that the rule was imposed for that thread only to make a fairly dumb observation that it would be bad to try to enforce it for the next many months. I [responded to that with](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8797367#post8797367) > [@tomndebb](#): > > I was quite specific for those who read my words. > Multiple posters in multiple posts with multiple perspectives of the issues had made derogatory comments that were borderline fighting words. > No one violated any specific rules (otherwise I would have named the people who were in violation). > The general heat of the thread was already at the boiling point with only 14 posts. > > In the interest of not letting this thread get personal or deterioriating into a trainwreck, I noted that the rule regarding insults was being tightened for this thread only so that this rather serious topic could be discussed without degenerating into personal attacks. To which [you replied, again](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8798202#post8798202), with your self-serving > [@Shodan](#): > > So, to clarify, Dopers are not allowed to insult people who might share opinions with Dopers? Is that the point of your post? > > [Quote=tomndebb] > If you (or anyone) is simply not capable of carrying on this discussion without resorting to name-calling, then you (or anyone else) may open a thread in the Pit and hurl insults till the cows come home. As I mentioned, I have not engaged in any name-calling or personal attacks. If you were warning us all not to start, I have no intention of doing so. [/quote] in which you make a point of pretending my point was not clear while further pretending that you had had no part in the general rancor of the thread. That is the dishonest part on which I called you. And since you were interrupting the thread to make your whiny complaint, I called you on it in blunt language. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2007, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/149 "2007-12-25T17:12:59Z")
So, when Shodan and tomndebb are done with their pissing match, letā€™s not forget some remaining clarifications to be made. Please make a note of getting back to my post #135. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/150 "2007-12-26T08:45:13Z")
[QUOTE=MrDibble] I do not lie. You may be a liar, but donā€™t project that onto me. Lying goes against my religious beliefs. [/QUOTE] Iā€™m sure thatā€™s true. What I donā€™t believe is that you have never in your life lied. And I do not identify myself as a liar. I have lied (as has everyone, which is my point), but I do not believe that makes me a liar (again, thatā€™s my point). I nearly never lie at this point in my life, and when I do it is invariably to people I donā€™t know over things that arenā€™t important, just to simplify my life (for instance, lying to the DWP when I tell them I am my sister when I call about her bill on her behalf.) I donā€™t think that kind of lying makes it accurate or meaningful to call me a liar. Because pretty much everyone tells little stupid lies like that. And I think most people have occasionally told a more significant lie over something more important, but donā€™t generally do that, and I donā€™t think itā€™s fair to use that to label someone a liar, either. A liar is someone who lies frequently, easily, for their own gain or amusment, generally without concern or remorse over having done so, in my opinion. And for the record, I canā€™t stand lying. Itā€™s my #1 issue with people, so itā€™s not like Iā€™m defending something here. Itā€™s sort of because I have such a problem with it that I think itā€™s important to draw distinctions around the ways and reasons and motives and frequency of the lies that people tell. ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/151 "2007-12-26T09:32:24Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Besides which, short of mind-reading or water-boarding, how can you possibly _know_ that someone is lying? [/QUOTE] I agree. Imputing motive isnā€™t the way to go. To say someone is ā€˜deliberatelyā€™ misreading something, for example. Or saying someone is purposely misrepresenting something or lying, etc. I think itā€™s much more useful for debate to just make assertions when appropriate about the truthfulness or accuracy of a given statement. Disparaging a statement or belief seems okay. Disparaging the person isnā€™t. Itā€™s against the rules to say someone is trolling, isnā€™t it? That seems to be part of the philosophy of not imputing motives. ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/152 "2007-12-26T09:37:01Z")
[QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated] And that quote right there says it all. I see you now, my brother. Iā€™ll stay out of your way and off your shit list. Letā€™s not get hijack this thread any further. [/QUOTE] Nzinga, Seated ā€“ I like your name. šŸ˜‰ ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/153 "2007-12-26T09:43:47Z")
[QUOTE=Stoid] What I donā€™t believe is that you have never in your life lied. [/QUOTE] True enough. [QUOTE=Stoid] A liar is someone who lies frequently, easily, for their own gain or amusment, generally without concern or remorse over having done so, in my opinion. [/QUOTE] Iā€™ll readily agree that thatā€™s a better, more complete definition than mine. I was going for pithy, but youā€™re right, your definition is both more accurate and more relevant. I stand corrected. ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/154 "2007-12-26T09:56:44Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] It is probably no more than fair to point out that **tomndebb** does this to other posters besides myself (see the links). So his attempt to characterize this as a one-time dispute between him and me is not accurate. [/QUOTE] Though I believe we have been on opposite sides of some issues in other threads, **Shodan** , I must agree with you on this statement given my own experience. Iā€™m glad to see you stand up for yourself. ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/155 "2007-12-26T10:01:20Z")
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim] So, when Shodan and tomndebb are done with their pissing match, letā€™s not forget some remaining clarifications to be made. Please make a note of getting back to my post #135. [/QUOTE] Given the constant imputations of motive being made by one side there, I think itā€™ll be a while! :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/156 "2007-12-26T10:51:44Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] **tomndebā€™s** decision to ban this man will long be remembered. That act of partisan calumny must be undone. Surely even those of you who disagreed with **epithet liar** must concede his powerful presence and forceful words. This is the time for all subscribers to unite. Reinstate **epithet liar!** Reinstate **epithet liar!** [/QUOTE] Iā€™ve had unpleasant interactions with this same moderator but you and I would probably be on the opposite ends of most every debate or issue if youā€™re a religious or conservative person given that Iā€™m about as opposite of that as can be imagined. I also donā€™t know if the ban was warranted because I havenā€™t researched all the posts, but all I can say is this: much as it pains me to ā€˜defendā€™ (so to speak) \*\*tomndebb \*\*in any way about anything, I canā€™t imagine his reason for banning this guy could be because the person is a ā€œconservative posterā€ as you theorized. I donā€™t know what the reason was, but I canā€™t imagine that could be the reason given how opposite I am from conservative and nonetheless falsely accused of motives that I donā€™t have in my posts and other hostilities. Iā€™ll add that the post you quoted from epithet was eloquent, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/157 "2007-12-26T18:31:42Z")
[QUOTE=MrDibble] True enough. Iā€™ll readily agree that thatā€™s a better, more complete definition than mine. I was going for pithy, but youā€™re right, your definition is both more accurate and more relevant. I stand corrected. [/QUOTE] Thank you very much! ---
**Author:** ![ForumBot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee59a6/32.png) [@ForumBot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ForumBot)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2007, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/158 "2007-12-27T06:36:47Z")
Canā€™t we at least say someone is lying to themselves? However will **Der Trihs** live without that? ---
**Author:** ![Saga](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saga/32/7281_2.png) [@Saga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saga)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2008, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/159 "2008-02-20T11:06:56Z")
Highly doubt anyone is intentionally misleading anyone else. Probably a case of mistaken knowledge. Therefore calling someone a liar is highly insulting. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2008, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867/160 "2008-02-20T17:58:57Z")
How about calling them a sock puppet? šŸ˜ƒ Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-liar-be-permissible-in-gd/429867.md?page=9)