Regarding our Rule on Insults (Please read post before voting)

[Violet]

By all means, discuss what the staff do. However, in this case, that thread went completely over the top towards the end, and it needed locking. A lot of members have agreed it was a good decision, and I'm one of them.

I don't think that it either went over the top or needed locking... and although I wouldn't claim that a lot of members even care about the thread either way... I'm quite certain I'm not alone in annoyance that it was locked What made it a good decision anyhow? Also, 74% or whatever of the votes on the top seem to think that the underlying idea of why it was supposedly locked was silly... an overreaction.

It was locked because all people were doing was throwing insults around. It was hardly the most productive of threads. What was petty was the amount of insults flying around, not the moderation that was put in place to stop it.

People were not only throwing insults around, and you know that. Go back from the end a few pages, and I can start reading from there and appreciate most of the posts from there to the end (even most of the ones I disagree with, I can appreciate enough to read and respond to with reffutations, counterarguments, and arguments of my own). There was an actual conversation going on, even with peopel being stubborn, and peppering their posts with insults (most of them minor, at that).

I find it petty that insults of such light caliber even had eyebrows raised... let alone moderational activity to stop it.

Sure, moron is a pretty tame insult, but an insult it was nonetheless, after a specific warning from an Admin not to do it. I didn't see Synackaon complain about it.

And what matters it that it was an insult? 0.o Why would an admin warn people about insulting, especially what with how vehemently the site owner usually appears to suggest that freedom of speech is one of the best things about this site (which I agree with, as it happens)? Insulting is as much a part of free speech as is 'hate speech'... and frankly I think that the reputation tool and our ability to skip over peoples posts (or if we really dont like someone, the ignore tool) are better answers to bigots than banning them (though i suppose it is the simpler solution). :S

Did I say Synackaon did complain about it? Again, I'm only irrate that I can't respond to any of the last several pages, which include a few posts where I wath either addressed or mentioned... Synackaon's probably as done with the thread as you are. ^_^

It wasn't an idle threat, it was a real threat. A real threat that was quickly executed when people ignored it. For the record, In This Mind left the forums way before Eilonnwy shut the thread. If the conversation is doomed to come up again, so be it. At least people have had some time to breathe and chill in between; maybe it won't be so fiery next time.

And if I encated some of my threats, I'd be in prison. Really.. if 'moron' applied to her threat... then I can see lots of other words being interpretted as insults. 'Honey' some people might find insulting... 'Silly one' would probably be seen as condescending when I address other people as such (even though I hardly intend said remark that way)... hell even 'friend' can be damn insulting... more so than calling someone a 'five-titted boob wearing their left sock on their strap on penis', which just seems more a string of expletives than anything, even if I were to call you one in absolute seriousness. I rather agree with Dotard (and there was another, I'll be damned if I can remember who it was off the top of my head) about this whole 'insults' thing.

Ohhh! I totally had no idea she left Although really, I could have applied the same statement to either Ely or Gameslover. The fact is... they were rambling on about 'victim blaming' till the end, and I still can't put press myself to respond to Ely in dissent unless she crosses a line such as denying my womanhood

I say that the conversation is doomed to come up again, and that it will probably completely derail a future thread in doing so. People have had this 'break' methinks... and if they really felt they needed one: they could simply not look at that thread for a few days. How can it get any less fire when people disagree than it was? :S I'm still of the opinion that it was positively mellow... 0.o

The community don't make the rules here, nor do they enforce them. We do. The community can discuss any decision made by the staff, but ultimately it is up to the staff whether that decision was a good one or not. I can't speak for any other staff, but I'm fully in support of the decision made.

I did not believe I suggested that the comunity made the rules (or enforced them)... and only believed that it should be discussed. Ely's deleting my post last time doesn't exactly give me a lot of faith that the entire forum team is in accordance when it comes to the idea that the community can discuss decisions... but I'm glad at least you do

I think that the staff should at least be somewhat interested in what we have to say, and might change their decisions if they see reason to (as in not leaving decisions set in stone, and being able to return to them later and change them, unlike our (american) law system if I recall correctly).

[Autumnlicious]

True - I was glad to see the thread locked - the unwillingness of certain parties to participate in discussion was driving me crazy.

Still, it saddens me to know that I deprived Sae of a piece of the action.

I am in agreement that the time has come to lock threads and warn people when it has devolved into long vitriolic explicatives, when someone retreats from elegant responses peppered with insults into a gutter of explicatives.

But I disagree on other aspects. That is my opinion and my opinion alone.

That is all.