When "Attack the post, not the poster" is insufficient.

[MrDibble]

@Riemann

I agree, but is the constraint really about whether the form of words is technically addressed to the post or the poster? It seems to me that it’s about whether you are actually addressing the substance of what is actually written in the post, and in a civil and constructive manner. If the arguments in the post are clearly written from a perspective of (say) complete ignorance of the relevant scientific principles, I’m not sure that I see it as a problem to (civilly) point that out and explain the science, even if technically the ignorance is an attribute of the person rather than the post.

I’d argue that there’s a clear difference between “You are displaying ignorance of X” vs “You are ignorant”.

[Riemann]

@MrDibble

I’d argue that there’s a clear difference between “You are displaying ignorance of X” vs “You are ignorant”.

I think we pretty much agree – any accusation of ignorance should be civil and have constructive substance to support it, and should be reasonable based on the content of the post per se.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@MrDibble

I’d argue that there’s a clear difference between “You are displaying ignorance of X” vs “You are ignorant”.

Even then, there are times that the phrase “you are ignorant” is non-insulting. I know nothing about German prog-rock of the 1990s. If I opined on the subject, and someone wrote, “LHOD, I think you’re ignorant of the influence of Baumaus on fin-de-siecle Berlin club music,” I’d take it as a straightforward claim (although I’d be super-delighted that there was a band called Baumaus). This wouldn’t work if they talked about how I was discrediting myself, calling my posts ignorant nonsense, and otherwise mocking me; it’d only work if they were getting ready to offer me a respectful eradication of my ignorance.

Not saying this phrase should be used more; rather, that insults lie in more than the magic phrases used, and that reading for intent and for care of language is the best way to determine whether something is an insult.

[Riemann]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

…insults lie in more than the magic phrases used…

Yup, that’s a nice way to express it.

[MrDibble]

@MrDibble

I’d argue that there’s a clear difference between “You are displaying ignorance of X” vs “You are ignorant”.

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

Even then, there are times that the phrase “you are ignorant” is non-insulting. I know nothing about German prog-rock of the 1990s. If I opined on the subject, and someone wrote, “LHOD, I think you’re ignorant of the influence of Baumaus on fin-de-siecle Berlin club music,”

But that’s akin to my first formulation, not my second. The second formulation is “You are ignorant. Full Stop.”

Perhaps it was the “are displaying” that muddied the waters there? It could also just have been “You are ignorant of X”, I was using “displaying” because of earlier posts.

[Riemann]

@MrDibble

But that’s akin to my first formulation, not my second…

Agreed, I took your distinction to mean when there is stated substance to the ignorance as lack of knowledge about something specific, rather than just using the word as a casual synonym for stupid.

[billfish678]

@Riemann

I think we pretty much agree – any accusation of ignorance should be civil and have constructive substance to support it, and should be reasonable based on the content of the post per se.

Totally agree.

If your accusations of “ignorance” don’t include some serious examples of how you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about…then you just need to STFU and/OR just point out how various points are/might be wrong and leave it at that…

obviously talking about different you/your origins blah blah blah

[kopek]

@madsircool

Blake is a she

I’ll probably forget but thanks for the correction.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@kopek

I’ll probably forget but thanks for the correction.

Please forget. It’s not true.

[madsircool]

@kopek

I’ll probably forget but thanks for the correction.

Sorry…I Got that wrong; confused him with Baker.

[Tamerlane]

@madsircool

Sorry…I Got that wrong; confused him with Baker.

I was just coming in to say I used to confuse the two as well - I was pretty sure that was exactly who you were thinking of ;).

[kopek]

Its OK – I’m so bad with names and/or genders that I probably forget both of them on a regular basis.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@kopek

Its OK – I’m so bad with names and/or genders that I probably forget both of them on a regular basis.

If someone is riding your ass about feeding cattle, it’s Blake. If someone is riding your ass about feeding sourdough starter, it’s Baker.