So it's okay to call another poster "goddamn liar" in IHMO now? Was it always okay?

About This Message Board
81

Okay, I can quit with the “name redacted” business. Really, as I wrote earlier, I was trying to maintain a patina of civility here, by not naming names while bitching in the same post about other posters (or their posts). Well, I thought that would help maintain a semblance of superficial diplomacy, anyway. I guest that didn’t work out so well.

Anyway, can you all see a distinct change (and not for the better) in my tone here? Yeah, now I’m getting PO’d. I’m trying to maintain a civil thread here (well, I was), even to the point of bringing an occasional bit of levity to break up the tension — that other thread providing a distinct opportunity to do so.

Only to get this?

Marley23 (or any mod), can we get some feedback on that? Something beyond this?

ladyfoxfyre, they’ve told me I should report things that I find offensive, so the mods can make their call on it. You wrote: “And continuing with the ‘reported’ nonsense doesn’t seem very honest either.” I wasn’t bluffing: I really did report this. In the report, of course, I’m allowed to make accusations that aren’t allowed publicly, and I stated exactly what rules I think you’re breaking. I wondered where it would go, and now maybe we’ll see what they say.

And I’m wondering: Did you not see the humor there? Or did you see the humor, but think it was bad offensive humor?

Marley23: Are you saying I’m wandering into warning territory, “name redacted” notwithstanding? If so, you didn’t say why. Because I wrote “Can the mods figure out what I mean by that remark?” (To which you answered: No.) Problem there was, I can’t state what my complaint was without, like, stating what my complaint was. Which itself would be a violation of the rules (I think). And it looks like that’s how you (ETA: and Colibri) took it. Did my wording seem snarky there? I was casting about for a way to discuss it without stepping over the line. I gather, that isn’t it.

Now, it may be that I’m just not understanding the protocol for raising a complaint. Am I just supposed to write a single-word post saying “Reported” and leave it at that? (Actually, I was already going to post a separate post asking about that.) Anyway, I did report, and I did state the complaint. [del]So far, from your response here, I’m thinking that my earlier speculation was right: That it won’t end well (for me, anyway).[/del] (Redacted in light of Colibri’s post.)

Troppus: It sounds like you are focusing on the MRM issues in your post. As I mentioned earlier, it’s not my interest in this thread to debate the merits of that.

Colibri: With this post, do you still think I’m trolling?

82

Can do. Good opportunity now, therefore, for me to escape and do, you know, some other stuff for a few hours. :wink:

83

She’s allowed to object to your opinion. I don’t think “chill out” is really worth modding.

No. I’m just saying it’s pointless.

I really have no idea what you’re talking about here.

It’s usually better if you don’t say “reported.” Just report the post and leave it alone.

84

Wow. You have got to be kidding me. I’m not even going to engage with you any longer after this show. If you were seriously offended by that post, and not just engaging in some show of, what, spite? reductio ad absurdem?, then I fear there is no way to have a discussion with you about nearly anything. I haven’t found you to be humorous at all, mainly you’ve just come across as exceedingly pedantic. So no, I didn’t take your post as a joke because it borders so close to your actual objections about moderation. Offensive? No. I thought it was dumb, the same way I’ve thought the whole “overly ostentatious show of how visibly offended they are by things which are not offensive for the purpose of demonstrating the slippery slope of the new moderating direction” has been when everyone else does it.

How ridiculous you are being.
I await your inevitable report of this post.

85

I have and am; Senegoid is awesome.

86

No need to wait because this really is over the line. You can’t insult other posters in this forum. If you think Senegoid is not worth the time, just disengage. And it probably really would help you to take a breath and take this a little less seriously.

87

Just gotta say, band name.

88

This whole “liar/lie” thing is pretty empty anyway, it becomes a grammar game, instead of a sincere examination of whether someone is being insulting (rude, a jerk). It’s supposed to represent “attack the post, not the poster”, but in reality poster attacks are SOP around here, and that thread brims with examples.

What is insulting, what is rude, what is jerky, is making it personal. It isn’t all that complicated a distinction, really - when you start talking about who someone is, how they think, what they do, when you start speculating about their past, their experiences, their psychological makeup, well, *you are making it personal *and, for my money, being a jerk. Which is against the rules.

Yet SDMB posters do that almost as a matter of course without anyone paying much attention at all, other than to admire and applaud one another’s cutting remarks.

In the thread in question:

(from a mod, no less):

If someone is lying about a factually provable thing, they are being a liar in that instance - liars are people who lie and that can be objectively demonstrated. So saying that someone is a liar when you can demonstrate that they have lied seems like a pretty weak example of being a jerk or being insulting. (Although I’m on board with it)

The remarks above, however, are clear examples of the way posters veer away from discussion and debate about ideas and substitute mockery, insults, and shaming. Which is ugly, mean, and cheap. And depressingly common.

89

See, now, I think that LFF was using restraint and being careful to stay within the lines in this instance but you misquoted her, changing the fundamental character of what she said!

She didn’t say

Which was how you quoted her! (Shame!)

What she actually said was

and that is a distinction WITH a major difference!

It is fair and reasonable, and not insulting (for insult’s sake) to say that someone is being ridiculous in a particular and specific context. That may be a bit harsh, but it is not the same thing as saying they are ridiculous. We all know this, do we not? Do I have to defend this further?

“You are being silly” is not “You are silly”

“You are being foolish” is not “you are foolish”

Hell, man, that’s the whole point of this, right?:

“You lied” is not “You are a liar”

We can all be something in a given moment, even something unflattering, and we should be allowed to say so. What is insulting and jerky and over the line is saying that someone is anything unflattering all the time, that it is who they are, that it is a defining feature of their being. Not only is it jerky, none of us are qualified to say such things about each other given the context in which we know one another! We can ONLY speak to the way someone is being in the context of having this exchange on this forum, which is hardly a complete picture of anyone.

Seems clear to me that if you keep that in mind when you are responding to people, modifying your language to reflect that, just as LFF just did, you won’t ever be a jerk.

90

So I could tell you that you’re being a gibbering moron and it’s OK as long as I don’t actually call you a gibbering moron?

I thought it was pretty cut-and-dried.

91

I guess I’d have to ask you a question: do you consider it acceptably impersonal and non-insulting to say to someone: “Your argument is the argument of a gibbering moron”?

On the other hand, do you consider it unacceptably insulting and personal to say to someone “Your argument is ridiculous”?

If you answer to both questions is yes, then I guess it’s not cut-and-dried at all and some further hammering is called for. (Although I confess I’m a little hazy on precisely what you consider cut-and-dried.)

If it’s no, then you’ve answered your own question.

92

Reported for changing a user’s words in a quote box.

93

She edited her post, and they both posted within five minutes. Looks like he just busted her before she realized she should probably self-censor.

94

I am so glad I am not a mod

95

Is (Name Redacted) the new “Regards”? -_-

If so why not have some fun with it?

Regards,
[Name Redacted]

96

Which of course he didn’t do. I checked, and Marley quoted the original version of ladyfoxfire’s post. ladyfoxfire changed her post, not Marley.

97

Just to be absolutely clear: there are the rules for the whole board, housed in ATMB. They are generally assumed to apply to all the forums. Some forum-moderators thought that special exceptions were required for their forums: the Pit and Great Debates, for instance. Some forums felt that special emphasis was required – for instance, spoilers are far more important in Cafe Society than in General Questions. Some forums are often “entry points” for newcomers, so the “forum rules/information” stickies are essentially links to the general rules (perhaps with forum definition.) Some forums didn’t see any need for repeating the link to the general rules or having special exceptions/emphasis, so there is no special forum rules thread in (say) ATMB or Elections or IMHO. So that’s why.

98

Kinda busy here, but wanted to throw these two cents in. And I apologize if this point has already been made.

I think the “that’s a lie” and " you’re a liar" distinction is balony. IMO BOTH seriously imply the person is stating a falsehood ON PURPOSE.

There are exceptions to that I suppose like “Expert X says Y”. Yeah its the expert that said it, not the poster so “thats a lie” stands on firm ground.

But if someone says they did/saw/something else and someone else says “thats a lie”, thats prettty darn much calling the person a liar.

99

Thanks C K Dexter Haven and Marley23 for the clarification.

100

She edited her post after I hit the “quote” button. :rolleyes: