You can't chide someone for trolling IRL either?

[Irishman]

@Riemann

HurricaneDitka’s statement was an honest description of his activities off the board, activities that might reasonably be construed as “real-life trolling” of liberals.

Say what? I do not see any list of activities by HurricaneDitka.

Here’s his post again:

@HurricaneDitka

NO! I strongly disagree with this! It is, in fact, my principle objection to NEA funding (and a whole host of other federal programs), and there are lots of “Constitutional conservatives” that feel the same way. There are certain things that the Constitution authorizes the federal government to do. “Funding art” isn’t on the list. I wouldn’t object to California taxing Californians to fund a California Endowment for the Arts, but I do object the feds doing it at a national level because I believe it’s “unconstitutional”.

Poking libtards in the eye is just an ancillary benefit.

He says he opposes the federal government funding a whole host of programs because funding those programs is “unconstitutional”. That’s the sum total of the list of things I see.

Elvis did not accuse HurricaneDitka of trolling on the board (i.e. making bad-faith statements to provoke other board members), he commented that he disapproved of HurricaneDitka’s real-life trolling to provoke real-life liberals.

Show me again where HurricaneDitka said anything about IRL activities. How do you limit his sentence to be constrained to IRL, rather than mean he likes riling up liberals on the board?

By analogy, the stricture against accusations of lying applies to alleged lies made in one’s statements on the board. Suppose, in a discussion of sexual politics, poster X states (honestly) that he lied to his wife about his infidelity. Poster Y is surely free to state that he believes that “lying to your wife in such circumstances is despicable”, without being warned for calling poster X a liar.

Agreed, but it has no relevance to this incident.