NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok. Ding me for calling an immature twit a baby. Ding me for daring to suggest that people should at least make a gesture in the direction of offering a positive suggestion now and then. But at least take notice when a thread I create is hijacked by the very same people who accuse me of flaming them: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=442407&page=1&pp=15

Please note that Potaria ( "Limit Presidential vacation time." ) and Caribel ( "Get bu$h out of office." ) and Dobbsworld ( "Fit all Americans with mandatory GPS "emergency" tracking chips. Oh, and house them all permanently in domed stadiums, where they can always be "rescued" with greater ease." ) and The Nazz ( "Appoint qualified people with experience, not roommates of political appointees. Not that we should have expected anything more from Bush--his track record is one of incompetence and cronyism." ) and German Nightmare ( "Run Bu$h out of office? The country? Or better, set him down with Marine 1, take off, and broadcast it on live TV. See how caring and appreciative the people from New Orleans really are. The president plays his guitar in California while people in Lousiana are drowning, starving, dying of thirst, or lack of medication, being robbed, shot, raped" ).

Mods, you don't see this as a pattern? Everytime I post anything, this same crowd either hijacks the thread, or makes innane comments, or flames, or spams. I know who's behind it too, although there's no way to prove it.

I would just like a bit more even-handed approach, a bit of fairness. I made that thread as a serious attempt to discuss possible changes in the systemic problems that were uncovered during this disaster. You are correct when you warn me about being borderline insulting, I've never disputed that, but surely you can see why I would lash back at this sort of thing, yes?

You need to understand that I was responding to an initial request in Moderation, and that a review of the entire thread was something that I was already working on when you posted this. There are plenty of things that I'm trying to juggle in the Moderation forum, so be patient.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9587347&postcount=37

wow, de-ja-vous all over again.



edit: Yes, I'd agree; Euro's mod plate runneth over. It seems this storm has brought the worst out in people - and not just in New Orleans.

(offers Euroslavia a pillow (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=442397) as comfort)


.

Surely however there is a marked difference between insulting the administration and directly insulting fellow posters. Most of us seem to be able to walk that line without undo guidence.

Surely however there is a marked difference between insulting the administration and directly insulting fellow posters. Most of us seem to be able to walk that line without undo guidence.
I'm not following you. Expand please.

I'm not following you. Expand please.
The way I understand it is that it's one thing to expect us to be civil to each other--reasonable--and another to take insults hurled at the Bush adminstration personally--unreasonable. Where the line gets blurry, I think, is when a person insults an entire group (leftists, for example) with what amounts to a personal or ad hominem attack as opposed to simply criticizing policy.

The way I understand it is that it's one thing to expect us to be civil to each other--reasonable--and another to take insults hurled at the Bush adminstration personally--unreasonable. Where the line gets blurry, I think, is when a person insults an entire group (leftists, for example) with what amounts to a personal or ad hominem attack as opposed to simply criticizing policy.
Exactly-for instance, This (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9586844&postcount=3) is an attack on Bush:
Get bu$h out of office.
who is not, as far as we know, a poster on this forum. And indeed, we have a fiercly protected right to critisize the man in our country (acknowledging that NS is NOT the United States, nor is it based there, nor is it even started by an American). This is not an articulate post, but certainly a criticism of the man, Bush, who for whatever reason he feels is the problem. But really, the biggest crime is a lack of articulation. Why would removing Bush make response better?

However, there are no rules that say we have to be nice to public figures. In fact, there is an established practice of being very mean to public figures here.

However, this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9587021&postcount=18) is actually a direct insult to the player-
Awww! Poor BABIE! Did I hurt your widdle feewings? Tsk!

and then a large grouping of players here:

If I ever needed proof that the left is seriously demented, you just supplied it.


Now, perhaps you could argue that insulting Bush somehow insults his supporters. However, if this is to be accepted the whole of the forum has nothing on Eutrusca for what he has heaped on John Kerry. But I wouldn't dream of even considering that anything worth reporting-it's something that is dealt with in debate, preferably without resorting to calling anyone a baby.

So basicly I'm calling to issue comparing Ok. Ding me for calling an immature twit a baby. to critisizing the president as like amounts of flame and flame bait seems a little suspect to me.

It seems to me that one would need to have a thicker skin when public officials are critsized, and to not take those criticisms personally and retort by directly insulting the poster-not to use that as an excuse for juvenile personal attacks.

Well Eutrusca is good at flame baiting.

Well Eutrusca is good at flame baiting.
Okay, I know it sounds weak considering what I last wrote in this thread, but I really think that we should be careful not to turn this into some sort of dogpile on Eutrusca deal. While in this case I am using Eutrusca as an example becuase it's demonstrable here, I am more concerned with defining the line between critisizing a public figure and flaming a player directly.

I don't think anything constructive can come out of pinning Eutrusca out of hand.

Okay, I know it sounds weak considering what I last wrote in this thread, but I really think that we should be careful not to turn this into some sort of dogpile on Eutrusca deal. While in this case I am using Eutrusca as an example becuase it's demonstrable here, I am more concerned with defining the line between critisizing a public figure and flaming a player directly.

I don't think anything constructive can come out of pinning Eutrusca out of hand.
Absolutely. There are players of all political stripes who are good at this sort of game--using insults of groups to stand in for personal insults of individual players. It's not right, even though I imagine I could be accused of having done it myself. I try not to do it anymore--when I fling an insult, it's carefully directed at public figures.

And we could all stand to distance ourselves from those public figures--an insult of Bush is not an insult of all Republicans, or all conservatives. An insult of Howard Dean is not an insult of all Democrats, or all liberals, etc. We need to make sure we don't take it that way--some of the responsibility devolves upon us as individuals.

That's about enough.

Euro has said that he's reviewing the thread.

The thread has been fully reviewed, and the statements that have been made so far stand. No official warnings will be handed out.

edit; looks like Euroslavia hit send right before me.


And we could all stand to distance ourselves from those public figures--an insult of Bush is not an insult of all Republicans, or all conservatives. An insult of Howard Dean is not an insult of all Democrats, or all liberals, etc. We need to make sure we don't take it that way--some of the responsibility devolves upon us as individuals.

On the surface this sounds reasonable, but examine it a bit further and there are some disturbing points.

First of all, the complaint Etrusca posts is not saying that these things are all flames as much as they are unwelcome hijacks, innane comments and other things intended to harass and annoy. That would seem obvious.

Being critical of public people is a good practice, but criticism and insults are two very different things. (something which I am starting to believe is lost on most posters here at NS)

Also, an elected official is also an embodyment of political ideas. The suggestion that 'Bush is Stupid' or "Gore is an idiot" is also a comment on their political opinions and the opinions of the people who support them.

If we are to insult political opinions then that would mean the statements "Gay marriage is stupid", "Communism is stupid" and "Democracy is stupid" are all acceptable. I disagree with that. Particularly when it is propogated by a group of people who track down a poster throwing such insulting statements at them wherever they go. That is, if not baiting behavior, certainly abusive and harassment.

If B0zzy started a meaningfull thread; "The virtues of Communism" and the first post was "B0zzy, Communism is stupid" that would qualify as an insult; By association you'd be calling the author stupid. To relieve it from insult all one would have to do is this; "B0zzy, I think communism is stupid and here is why;"

It is subtle, but effective. I have to say, though Etrusca is no saint, he has a point here. Is it actioinable - apparently not, but that does not make it something we should endeavor to emulate.

edit; looks like Euroslavia hit send right before me.



On the surface this sounds reasonable, but examine it a bit further and there are some disturbing points.

First of all, the complaint Etrusca posts is not saying that these things are all flames as much as they are unwelcome hijacks, innane comments and other things intended to harass and annoy. That would seem obvious.

Being critical of public people is a good practice, but criticism and insults are two very different things. (something which I am starting to believe is lost on most posters here at NS)

Also, an elected official is also an embodyment of political ideas. The suggestion that 'Bush is Stupid' or "Gore is an idiot" is also a comment on their political opinions and the opinions of the people who support them.

If we are to insult political opinions then that would mean the statements "Gay marriage is stupid", "Communism is stupid" and "Democracy is stupid" are all acceptable. I disagree with that. Particularly when it is propogated by a group of people who track down a poster throwing such insulting statements at them wherever they go. That is, if not baiting behavior, certainly abusive and harassment.


I was starting to think I was the only one who could see the "pack" attacks going on on NS. It is obvious if you only look.