True about the assumptions--I wrote poorly and was speaking for myself. Still, I'd bet a fiver everyone on this thread has broken the abuse rule at least once. 
If someone is actually making a threat that shows intent to harm another user, that is a credible form of actionable abuse. Showing that in court is tricky, of course, but a contact with the police *usually* stops the threat. (Often, action is taken when someone can demonstrate a pattern of threats that indicate genuine intent. Then the police gather evidence.) That is when the forum moderators have a duty to inform the police. I scroll past ad hominem attacks because I frankly find them boring. So, my yardstick there is my level of boredom. Sorry I don't have a better justification than that. I simply don't take internet insults that seriously.
Consequently, if what you're asking is for people like me to intervene in any case in which someone is called a bad name on this forum, I'm afraid I'll have to decline. I simply don't have the time to do that, especially since so many of these things occur on the internet due to juvenile trolling. I also don't respond to every drunk and tramp who shouts rubbish at people on the street. Surely you agree, also, that trading barbs on the internet very rarely leads to threats of physical violence with genuine intent to carry them out.
How and when does internet abuse lead to genuine threats of violence? How often? How do you know that abuse is motivated by genuine anger? I don't think you can really answer those questions, because here we are nothing more than electronic entities represented by avatars with cartoonish "emoticons".
If what you're asking is for me to police my own behavior and consider the ethical ramifications of what I do--well, I do that anyway. If you're doing this simply to raise consciousness, I think you've achieved it, so it's probably time to put the issue to rest. If you're saying, "Let's establish a community code of conduct and enforce it amongst each other." No. Count me out. I suppose I will have failed your ethical litmus test.
On another note, don't you think getting atheists to establish a code of internet conduct and shared values (beyond a lack of belief in god(s)) is a bit like herding cats? Not to open a can of worms, but I thought that was the philosophy behind Athiesm+, or whatever that site is called. I must confess I'm not particularly attracted to that sort of thing, mainly because I grew up around hardcore theists who were constantly micro-managing others' thought and behavior.
Z
If someone is actually making a threat that shows intent to harm another user, that is a credible form of actionable abuse. Showing that in court is tricky, of course, but a contact with the police *usually* stops the threat. (Often, action is taken when someone can demonstrate a pattern of threats that indicate genuine intent. Then the police gather evidence.) That is when the forum moderators have a duty to inform the police. I scroll past ad hominem attacks because I frankly find them boring. So, my yardstick there is my level of boredom. Sorry I don't have a better justification than that. I simply don't take internet insults that seriously.
Consequently, if what you're asking is for people like me to intervene in any case in which someone is called a bad name on this forum, I'm afraid I'll have to decline. I simply don't have the time to do that, especially since so many of these things occur on the internet due to juvenile trolling. I also don't respond to every drunk and tramp who shouts rubbish at people on the street. Surely you agree, also, that trading barbs on the internet very rarely leads to threats of physical violence with genuine intent to carry them out.
How and when does internet abuse lead to genuine threats of violence? How often? How do you know that abuse is motivated by genuine anger? I don't think you can really answer those questions, because here we are nothing more than electronic entities represented by avatars with cartoonish "emoticons".
If what you're asking is for me to police my own behavior and consider the ethical ramifications of what I do--well, I do that anyway. If you're doing this simply to raise consciousness, I think you've achieved it, so it's probably time to put the issue to rest. If you're saying, "Let's establish a community code of conduct and enforce it amongst each other." No. Count me out. I suppose I will have failed your ethical litmus test.
On another note, don't you think getting atheists to establish a code of internet conduct and shared values (beyond a lack of belief in god(s)) is a bit like herding cats? Not to open a can of worms, but I thought that was the philosophy behind Athiesm+, or whatever that site is called. I must confess I'm not particularly attracted to that sort of thing, mainly because I grew up around hardcore theists who were constantly micro-managing others' thought and behavior.
Z
I'm always in search for faith-free spaces. Let's make them, enlarge them, and enjoy them!
Bertrand Russell quotes!
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State -- if you haven't joined their Facebook page, do so by all means.
Bertrand Russell quotes!
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State -- if you haven't joined their Facebook page, do so by all means.
