# yet another bad call - **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [January 18, 2015, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213 "2015-01-18T21:04:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Krav\_Manga](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/krav_manga/32/3153_2.png) [@Krav\_Manga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Krav_Manga)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/21 "2015-01-19T04:05:53Z")
> [@kayT](#): > > I don’t agree with this warning at all. I personally think a different poster would not have been warned for saying the same thing. That would be [Czarcasm](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15535977&postcount=74) ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/22 "2015-01-19T04:31:42Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > It was a personal attack as well. Nitpicking exactly how close it was is irrelevant to the warning. How was it a personal attack? I made a comment on the quality of his posts. I said if he was going to accuse other posters of being “idiots” and making “stupid” posts then he should work on the quality of his own posts. How was that a personal attack? Please be specific. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/23 "2015-01-19T04:40:00Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > Merely quoting another poster’s post wouldn’t deserve a warning but saying is attacking the poster, at least in my opinion. > > Yes, it’s attacking the post, but it’s also slamming the poster. YMMV. Why? Where exactly did I cross the line between critiquing a post and engaging in a personal attack? Please be specific? I’d like to know because respectfully mods have often given rather inconsistent rulings. For example, to their credit, some mods, most notably Dex have had dramatically different standard regarding what constitutes hate speech when the targets are Jews or Muslims. I’d like to know where the line is. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/24 "2015-01-19T04:46:46Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Please, explain how telling someone to work on their own posts before calling someone else’s “fucking stupid”, with quote marks to make it clear they were quoting said person, is an insult. Be specific. I’m agreed with this. I’m not seeing the insult and would be interested in seeing more about why the post was insulting. It looked to me like the poster was asking the OP to reconsider their tone if they’re looking for a positive response. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/25 "2015-01-19T04:51:06Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > How was it a personal attack? > > I made a comment on the quality of his posts. > > I said if he was going to accuse other posters of being “idiots” and making “stupid” posts then he should work on the quality of his own posts. > > How was that a personal attack? > > Please be specific. That’s too easy **Ibn**. The statement was personal. And it was an attack (on the post). And it was insulting. The problem as I see it is that a) we generally permit attacks on posts, b) your post didn’t seem out of bounds of existing precedent, but most of all c) _the underlying point was legitimate and toning it down wasn’t an obvious exercise._ I mean I tried to edit it upthread, but I’m still not sure my effort passed muster. I mean that’s why we have the “Attack the post” rule. It’s hard to fight ignorance without applying strict scrutiny to claims made. But it’s not hard to avoid direct insults. With almost all warnings here, the underlying behavior is maladapted to fighting ignorance, usually blatantly so. I have little patience with the snowflakes here who feel a need to express every thought and sentiment that crosses their neural pathways, never mind their surroundings. But in this case fixing your post wasn’t so straightforward. This is hardly the worst trainwreck we’ve had, but it hasn’t been pleasant. ETA: Cross-post: Ibn: Hate speech is an attack on whole groups while we’re discussing an attack on an individual’s post in an allegedly insulting manner. Very different issues, very different lines. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/26 "2015-01-19T05:05:55Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > That’s too easy **Ibn**. The statement was personal. And it was an attack (on the post). And it was insulting. Since the rules have always made it clear we’re allowed to attack posts so long as we don’t attack the posters how exactly did I violate the rules? > [@](#): > > ETA: Cross-post: Ibn: Hate speech is an attack on whole groups while we’re discussing an attack on an individual’s post in an allegedly insulting manner. Very different issues, very different lines. Huh? What’s this in reference to? Is it referring to the fact that by the admission of at least one mod(Dex) SDMB has vastly different standards on what constitutes hate speech with regards to Muslims on the one hand and Jews on the other? FWIW, I don’t think Colibri ruled against me due to my ethnicity, though I do think his or her logic was extremely flawed and I’m confident that when he or she reflects on it she’ll conclude that the mod warning should be either rescinded or scaled back to the mod note. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/27 "2015-01-19T05:16:24Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Since the rules have always made it clear we’re allowed to attack posts so long as we don’t attack the posters how exactly did I violate the rules? > > Huh? What’s this in reference to? > > Is it referring to the fact that by the admission of at least one mod(Dex) SDMB has vastly different standards on what constitutes hate speech with regards to Muslims on the one hand and Jews on the other? > > FWIW, I don’t think Colibri ruled against me due to my ethnicity, though I do think his or her logic was extremely flawed and I’m confident that when he or she reflects on it she’ll conclude that the mod warning should be either rescinded or scaled back to the mod note. D’oh! Sometimes I think with my pride not my brain. Apologies. It’s the American side of me. I realize you were offering constructive criticism not attacks. I sincerely apologize for any suggestion otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/28 "2015-01-19T06:15:36Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > With almost all warnings here, the underlying behavior is maladapted to fighting ignorance, usually blatantly so. I have little patience with the snowflakes here who feel a need to express every thought and sentiment that crosses their neural pathways, never mind their surroundings. But in this case fixing your post wasn’t so straightforward. I’m not seeing your point here. To me, you seem to be posting to **Ibn Warraq** what he was posting to the OP of the other thread. That sounds just as insulting to me, calling people who post “snowflakes” and then adding some uncomplimentary things. I realize that you’re not specifying who you’re referring to, but that just leaves it open for interpretation. If it’s fighting ignorance for you to correct **Ibn Warraq** on how to post something to get the best response, then isn’t it the same for him to do that to the OP of the other thread? Does it have something to do with the OP’s use of profanity in the other thread? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/29 "2015-01-19T07:31:27Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > I’m not seeing your point here. To me, you seem to be posting to **Ibn Warraq** what he was posting to the OP of the other thread. That sounds just as insulting to me, calling people who post “snowflakes” and then adding some uncomplimentary things. I realize that you’re not specifying who you’re referring to, but that just leaves it open for interpretation. 1. Let me rewrite: “Setting this trainwreck aside, mods tend to penalize behavior which frankly doesn’t do much for fighting ignorance. I have little patience for snowflakes who see this board as purely a forum for self-indulgent expression.” 2. (Actually, we’re all here for self-expression to some extent, which is why I didn’t put it that way initially. So I was arguing something more narrow: at a certain point, requesting a certain (low) level of civility isn’t too much of a demand.) 3. Yes, I submitted a broadside against unnamed snowflakes (though honestly I had a style of posting in mind rather than a vendetta against an individual). That’s permitted. If the mods move the bar to make that less permissible, I can adapt. At any rate surely there’s a pretty bright line between a relevant sentence opposing unnamed goobers and a personal attack against a specific poster. The latter tends to lead to hijacks, the former to discussion. 4. I agree though that broadsides against unnamed snowflakes (and again, I don’t really have anyone in mind here) are not consistent with higher standards of civility: I wouldn’t express myself in that fashion at the Unaboard for example. > [@Giraffe](#): > > I haven’t the faintest idea what you guys think “personal insults” are any more. It’s truly baffling. I don’t think it’s that baffling. The old rule was, “Attack the post, not the poster.” Der Trihs followed those rules to the letter, much to the consternation of those who found the intensity of his contributions unsettling. Members became restless, as did guests. What to do? Soon afterward, Sheriff Jon Chance rode into town. _::cue music::_ Jon doesn’t take kindly to excessive incivility, at least not with women and young’uns around. So he starts handing out mod notes to tone things down a tad. Interestingly, he didn’t rack up an inordinate number of warnings. Instead, he and others issued a stream of individually tailored notes and directives: subsequent warnings wouldn’t be issued for incivility so much as for failing to obey moderator instructions. The fine upstanding citizenry of the SDMB rejoiced, while the black hats twirled their mustashes and shook their fists at the sky. Foiled again! At any rate, that’s my recommendation for the mods. Be careful before handing out a warning for attacks on posts. And when you frame a mod note, tell the poster to knock it off rather than wording it so that it sounds like you’re enforcing the personal attack rule. Unless of course, you really think that the figleaf is especially flimsy. I’m not claiming that my advice covers every particular situation. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/30 "2015-01-19T07:38:29Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > I haven’t the faintest idea what you guys think “personal insults” are any more. It’s truly baffling. Please, explain how telling someone to work on their own posts before calling someone else’s “fucking stupid”, with quote marks to make it clear they were quoting said person, is an insult. Be specific. This. I got called out by a mod for being derogatory towards a post (not a poster) a few days ago also. I don’t know what the rules are any more. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/31 "2015-01-19T07:52:17Z")
I agree with the OP. I feel Ibn Warraq stayed well within the principle of attacking the post rather than the poster. Obviously, anytime you say you explicitly disagree with a post, you’re also implicitly disagreeing with the person who wrote that post. If I write “the argument you gave is poorly reasoned” I’m pretty much saying “you’re a poor reasoner”. But this board has always had the policy that as long as you don’t directly attack the poster, these implications are allowable. And I don’t see how Ibn Warraq crossed the line. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/32 "2015-01-19T08:29:15Z")
Yep, bad call. ---
**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/33 "2015-01-19T15:56:55Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > If he didn’t directly call **Oliveritaly** an idiot, he came close enough to it that it makes no difference. Now if would have been Czar or Red Shirt… being close enough would have mattered, amirite? ---
**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:** [January 19, 2015, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/34 "2015-01-19T16:00:45Z")
I can see that the post in question was close to being an insult (in contrast to actually being one), and so a mod note would have made more sense, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/35 "2015-01-19T16:13:10Z")
> [@](#): > > Respectfully if you’re going to accuse others of being “idiots” and making “fucking stupid” posts, you might want to work on your own… I don’t see any way in which this is an attack on the poster rather than the posts. “Your own” means “your own (posts)”. Bad call, and should be rescinded. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/36 "2015-01-19T16:17:05Z")
I think it depends on which reading people are seeing here: “Respectfully if you’re going to accuse others of being “idiots” and making “fucking stupid” posts, you might want to work on your own [because your posts are fucking stupid]” or “Respectfully if you’re going to accuse others of being “idiots” and making “fucking stupid” posts, you might want to work on your own [because you’re an idiot]” I see the former, which is an attack on the posts. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/37 "2015-01-19T17:31:07Z")
I think the two readings are as follows: “Respectfully if you’re going to accuse others of being “idiots” and making “fucking stupid” posts, you might want to work on your own [posts, because your posts are fucking stupid]” or “Respectfully if you’re going to accuse others of being “idiots” and making “fucking stupid” posts, you might want to work on your own [posts, because you’re an idiot]” Both are attacks on the posts. And it is important to note that **Ibn Warraq** did not say that anyone was an idiot. It was not an insult, therefore. If the mods are going to sanction anyone who even thinks that another Doper is an idiot, even if he doesn’t say so, there aren’t going to be many of us left in a month or so. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/38 "2015-01-19T17:52:54Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I can see that the post in question was close to being an insult (in contrast to actually being one), and so a mod note would have made more sense, IMHO. Concur. A note, if that. ---
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/39 "2015-01-19T17:57:41Z")
I also didn’t feel that **Ibn** ’s comment warranted a warning. Or even a mod note, really. He more or less said, “People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”, with helpful quotes. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2015, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213/40 "2015-01-19T18:07:27Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. I agree with **simster**. The warning was a bad call, worthy of a mod note, maybe, but nothing more than that. I agree. A Note, maybe, but there was no personal insult. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-bad-call/710213.md?page=3)