No we are saying that he is being mocked for not actually committing suicide. That is literally the “joke”.
Chiming back in to say that I made my comment in this thread because I initally interpreted the mod note to specifically mean that it was in bad taste bad enough to require a mod note to mock Thích Quảng Đức, in the “too soon” or “how dare you” sense. I was wondering how I should have known that the suicide of Vietnamese monks a half-century ago was a bridge too far for finding humor. It didn’t occur to me that the mod note was about literally wishing death on someone (which is already an established rule) because it didn’t occur to me that someone would make that weird (IMHO) leap. It probably should have occurred to me, given past precident of the board’s grasp of humor.
No. As I’ve argued at length, both here, and the last time you rode this ailing pony,
I’d make the exact same arguments if it was any other poster. And have.
This.
And sorry to be unclear.
Jeebus do we have some people who try their damnedest to misunderstand.
Not being amused by shitty jokes us not the same thing as “misunderstanding”
We may be over sensitive but we are not being obtuse. The meaning is clear and your repeated explanations are making it more and more clear.
As excellently summarized in the linked thread, there’s a huge difference between judging someone for what they ARE, versus judging someone for whay they DO.
I’m unclear on why this needs a modnote. Ignore it or post a reply in the thread saying how you feel about it or PM the poster.
Humor is subjective, and when it is in written form, it can be misinterpreted because people will imbue their own tone to the words. That’s why I think clarification should be sought from the user who makes the post, and not be assumed as the worst that it could possibly be.