quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder
I could see a reason to require me to criticize someone...when it's so factual, it's illegal and they are what they are and calling them out will alert the higher powers. For example, someone posts something illegal like pedo stuff. I'm gonna call them out and call them a sick fuck and a pedo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: metamorfosis

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
...actually Pam, on further thought i see no difference in writing either way when applying it to a specific person.

 

No? Then why don't you choose to say it in a way that does NOT violate TOS?

quote:

talking about 'personal attack' as opposed to statement of truth doesn't change that. it's semantics.

No. The two statements mean different things. "You are a hypocrite" is a criticism of the person, themselves. "That is hypocritical" is a criticism of the argument. I think the administration is perfectly right in saying that the first is unacceptable while the second is.

I can think of no possible "context" that would require you to criticize the person instead of their argument. I don't think that rule is unreasonable or difficult to follow, and I'm mystified at this public outcry. That said, I would be willing to concede the point and abide by a new set of rules if that's what the majority of posters wanted. Can you say the same? Because, frankly, I think it's selfish for a small group of posters to try to impose their will over the majority. You've been "outvoted" on this. I think it's fair to expect you to abide by the consensus. If there were something inherently unfair about expecting people to attack the post and not the poster, then I might agree with you. What's right is right, and what's wrong is wrong, regardless of how many people agree. But this is simply a matter of preference. What makes what you want so much more important than the sum of what everyone wants?

If you want, I can start a poll and prove it. But I'm pretty sure the majority of posters like that rule the way it is and, that being the case, it's unreasonable to expect the mods to change it.

Pam

quote:

I'm gonna take care of it first before I call the authorities because that's just how much of a sick fuck they are.

quote:

Pam, i'm fed up of saying this, if you say to a particular person that they are a hypocrite, or 'that's hypocritical' that is semantics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: descrite

quote:

I'm gonna take care of it first before I call the authorities because that's just how much of a sick fuck they are.

Which, of course, makes you a hero.

Because every minute you spend insulting someone on the Internet, instead of calling the police and informing on someone who is actually putting children in danger, is a minute well spent...and obviously not a minute that law enforcement might have better spent tracking down the child abuser and saving some child from one extra minute of pain.

Good cost-benefit analysis.

quote:

Pam, i'm fed up of saying this, if you say to a particular person that they are a hypocrite, or 'that's hypocritical' that is semantics.

No, it's not. It's addressing the argument instead of the arguer.

"Your are stupid for wearing an ugly coat" is a lot different than "I don't like that type of coat."

The fact that you don't understand this might denote an ability to understand argumentation. And logic.


Think of it this way: a purple, two-headed monster walks into a bar and says, "I think America should stop bombing Iraq." Is your reply, "UGH! A MONSTER!" Or is it a reasoned refutation or concurrence with the monster's assertion?

Because, except for lw (who is a member of the Internet Police), nameless, faceless people discussing ideas on the Internet are usually more interested in the battleground of ideas than what someone looks like or whether they behave according to the rules you've tried to arbitrarily impose on them, yourself.

quote:

f you say to a particular person that they are a hypocrite, or 'that's hypocritical' that is semantics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

f you say to a particular person that they are a hypocrite, or 'that's hypocritical' that is semantics.

I disagree.

I can say... your ignorance is showing on this topic... meaning the lack of knowledge about a specific thing. That is a far cry different than calling someone ignorant. I could even say... you are ignorant about whatever the topic is... because the post would be the evidence. I have no evidence that the poster is truly ignorant .. meaning in all things.

quote:

I certainly got more gold letters than the whiny bitches who debated with me and lost ever did. That was because they reported me for personal attacks all the time and I refused to do the same because it was beneath me. I deal with a personal attack by removing their fucking head, not whining to mommy.

quote:

2) The jaded old "masters of kink"

Regulars are given free reign to stomp all over any discussion which fails to meet with their personal approval. Self-appointed arbiters of discussion tell people to "search for it" - thinking that because THEY happen to have discussed a particular question to death that nobody else has the right to discuss it. The possibility of just not reading the fucking thread is apparently to complex for them to process.

quote:

I wonder how long this post'll last.

quote:

read what i said to Descrite

quote:

and reading/quoting a whole post for context is better than snipping something to make you own point work.

practice what you preach.

needles

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaliko

I am in this place, and I am very much not being fucked at the moment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

read what i said to Descrite

I did read it.

And I quote.

quote:

and reading/quoting a whole post for context is better than snipping something to make you own point work.

practice what you preach.

needles

You are ignorant.... means lacking in knowledge in all areas.

You are ignorant in this topic.... is by far different. I am not calling the posters general intelligence into question.

Btw, I frequently admit when I am not knowledgeable on a topic... such as the Israel/Palestine conflict. If someone were to call me ignorant on that, I would have no choice but to agree.