# We can't link to Pit threads in GD? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [May 25, 2016, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680 "2016-05-25T18:09:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/41 "2016-05-25T23:39:13Z")
It has always been the rule that you can link to a pit thread about someone. All such links would be inherently insulting the person–of which calling someone a troll is a subset. I’d also argue it’s necessary. It informs the person that there is a pit thread about them, and informs other participants that the accusation has been made so they don’t unnecessarily feed them, without hijacking the thread. One of the more annoying things about the moderation on this board is how it does not remain consistent–only followed by the reluctance to tell people exactly what is warnable in certain situations. It’s like common law–you learn from how the moderation happens. Except no one honors precedents and you can’t appeal. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/42 "2016-05-26T00:11:27Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > One of the more annoying things about the moderation on this board is how it does not remain consistent–only followed by the reluctance to tell people exactly what is warnable in certain situations. It’s like common law–you learn from how the moderation happens. Except no one honors precedents and you can’t appeal. No doubt the Supreme Court provokes the same effect. Them’s the breaks. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/43 "2016-05-26T02:08:17Z")
Given that I can see an argument from both sides, I would hope that we would choose to view this from the aspect of “fewer rules are better” and allow such posts in the future. Posters should generally be able to reference Pit threads in reaction to posts without violating the “no insults in GD” rule. The purpose of the Pit is to flame, but it has long been considered board etiquette for the flamer to inform the flamee of said flaimitude. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/44 "2016-05-26T02:20:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Given that I can see an argument from both sides, I would hope that we would choose to view this from the aspect of “fewer rules are better” and allow such posts in the future. Posters should generally be able to reference Pit threads in reaction to posts without violating the “no insults in GD” rule. > > The purpose of the Pit is to flame, but it has long been considered board etiquette for the flamer to inform the flamee of said flaimitude. It’s as close to a direct insult as you can get without being a direct insult. Watch it be exploited. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/45 "2016-05-26T02:45:04Z")
To my mind, **kayaker** ’s comment showed exactly what the problem is: > [@kayaker](#): > > Failed? I thought it was just elegant enough to remain inbounds. He clearly saw it as a way to call someone a troll while purporting to be inside the line. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/46 "2016-05-26T02:57:33Z")
Look, if someone is an established troll, or a demonstrated racist, that often _is_ the most important thing to know before engaging with their posts. If this information is _already posted, on this site,_ and some fine parsing of rules prevents people from just pointing to it… that’s flat stupid. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/47 "2016-05-26T03:07:33Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > Look, if someone is an established troll, or a demonstrated racist, that often _is_ the most important thing to know before engaging with their posts. If this information is _already posted, on this site,_ and some fine parsing of rules prevents people from just pointing to it… that’s flat stupid. No. What’s counterproductive is not being able to separate the message from assumptions about the messenger. One should be able to debate or discuss the premise of the thread or ignore it without needing to insult the poster. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/48 "2016-05-26T03:16:15Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Given that I can see an argument from both sides, I would hope that we would choose to view this from the aspect of “fewer rules are better” and allow such posts in the future. Posters should generally be able to reference Pit threads in reaction to posts without violating the “no insults in GD” rule. > > The purpose of the Pit is to flame, but it has long been considered board etiquette for the flamer to inform the flamee of said flaimitude. I think there is some nuance missed (I missed it too). Referencing Pit threads still seems fine - it’s the manner in which they are referenced. Saying "here is a Pit thread " with it hyperlinked is probably always okay. Saying “here is a pit thread, Asshole” with a hyperlink is most likely not okay. It’s not the link but the msg in which it is delivered. The incident in the OP apparently drifted close to the latter and I think that’s a fair reading since it seemed to be directing comment at the OP as a poster. I avoid any confusion by not pitting anyone or changing posting behavior regardless of forum. ---
**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:** [May 26, 2016, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/49 "2016-05-26T05:30:35Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The incident in the OP apparently drifted close to the latter How? I didn’t use any insults in that thread, unlike your example. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/50 "2016-05-26T05:54:20Z")
TBH I’m not really sure - just trying to interpret what I see. I think if you had omitted the “to the OP” it may have gone unnoticed. Maybe? ---
**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:** [May 26, 2016, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/51 "2016-05-26T06:13:09Z")
Possibly, but probably not. Like i said, i can see the mod’s point, I’m not arguing this was bad moderation. Especially since it was just a note. Possibly inconsistent with the other examples given for linking to calling out racists, but I don’t expect too much consistency in moderation here, _especially_ when it comes to what’s considered an insult or not. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/52 "2016-05-26T11:00:51Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Because, in this case, it’s an accusation of trolling in GD. If the link was to a thread about someone holding odious opinions it wouldn’t have been a problem (I assume, not trying to speak for the mods). The thread he linked to was about the poster and his trolling. It was simply the most accurate thread **MrDibble** could find. I think this decision reflects the special sensitivity this board exhibits for racist debates instead of **MrDibble** violating any longstanding practice. Only in terms of my personal effort is there a difference between my linking to a pit thread I wrote and a pit thread I would have written. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/53 "2016-05-26T11:18:37Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > To my mind, **kayaker** ’s comment showed exactly what the problem is: > > **He clearly saw it as a way to call someone a troll while purporting to be inside the line.** Bolding mine. Well, except for the “kayaker” part. Did he call the OP a troll, or did he merely point out that a bunch of people had accumulated circumstantial evidence of trolling and does that difference matter? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/54 "2016-05-26T11:47:08Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Bolding mine. Well, except for the “kayaker” part. > > Did he call the OP a troll, or did he merely point out that a bunch of people had accumulated circumstantial evidence of trolling and does that difference matter? It was pretty straightforward: He said > [@](#): > > I think this link says all I need to say to the OP. , and the words “this link” linked to the “Omnibus Trolls R Us Thread”. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/55 "2016-05-26T12:08:11Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It was pretty straightforward: He said , and the words “this link” linked to the “Omnibus Trolls R Us Thread”. So, if the thread were titled “Please Read This” and was otherwise the same thread, it woulda been ok? ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/56 "2016-05-26T12:36:35Z")
I get it now. I’d assumed that **Mr Dibble** was linking to a thread that he’d begun in the Pit, ‘taking it to the Pit’ in other words, a practice which has always been allowed. But that isn’t what he did. He linked to the troll thread in a none-too-subtle attempt to characterize **GlowingDarkness** as a troll. It was a clear breach of GD rules and I see that now. ---
**Author:** ![Enola\_Gay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ab097/32.png) [@Enola\_Gay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enola_Gay)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/57 "2016-05-26T13:14:29Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I won’t lie. It hurts. Don’t take it personally. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/58 "2016-05-26T13:37:05Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I get it now. I’d assumed that **Mr Dibble** was linking to a thread that he’d begun in the Pit, ‘taking it to the Pit’ in other words, a practice which has always been allowed. > > But that isn’t what he did. He linked to the troll thread in a none-too-subtle attempt to characterize **GlowingDarkness** as a troll. It was a clear breach of GD rules and I see that now. So, if he had started his own Pit thread it would have been OK, but it’s not OK to link to a Pit thread started by someone else? Not seeing any significant space between those two actions. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/59 "2016-05-26T13:45:33Z")
From a technical standpoint I agree with the moderating and think there’s a clear distinction. If you merely say “I’ve started a Pit thread” or even link to it, you’ve not said anything negative in GD. You’ve only provided a link to somewhere else where the astute reader might guess has a high likelihood of containing negativity. But if you say “what I think of you is in this thread” then - even without a link - you’re made an insult in GD itself. It’s no different than if you said “I think you’re a 4 letter work ending with -erk” - you’ve essentially made the insult but just used a bit of a roundabout way to reference the insulting words without saying them. It’s a technical difference, to be sure, but technical differences are what remove subjectivity and allow people to follow things more easily. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680/60 "2016-05-26T16:50:03Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s no different than if you said “I think you’re a 4 letter work ending with -erk” Honestly, when it comes to this messageboard, I agree with you, I’m one of the great ones. Lord knows this board could use a few more perks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-cant-link-to-pit-threads-in-gd/755680.md?page=4)