NationStates Jolt Archive

Under the not-so-clever guise of sarcasm I suggested someone "die like the dog they are" I thought I'd save them the trouble and report it.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9642237#post9642237

If it actually is veiwed as a rules violation, I'll delete it permantly. Until then I've removed it from my post. It can still be seen in his quote though, for reveiw.

I find "I must ask that you die like the dog you are" is different from "I'm going to kill you." The distinction is subtle, but important. However, in either case I'd say your style of debate and sense of tact need an overhaul.

Standard Disclaimer: I am not a Moderator. I will never be a Moderator. Oh how the masses would weep and gnash their teeth if I were.

My NON-mod opinion: Not very nice, and far to emotional. Maker of that remark should take more distance from the debate.

I'm most offended by the use of "iregardless".

Under the not-so-clever guise of sarcasm I suggested someone "die like the dog they are" I thought I'd save them the trouble and report it.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9642237#post9642237

If it actually is veiwed as a rules violation, I'll delete it permantly. Until then I've removed it from my post. It can still be seen in his quote though, for reveiw.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9643556&postcount=38

Isn't reporting yourself against the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights?

Well whatever works for you.....

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9643556&postcount=38

Can I have a clarification? Let's use this example - does the fact that he's fairly obviously being sarcastic change the severity of the penalty? I noticed that his reporting himself and offering to discontinue the practice if it was found to be in violation factored in the severity of the penalty (meaning you gave him some leeway). Did the sarcasm lessen the severity because it means he doesn't actually wish the poster harm? Of course, I realize either way it's not acceptable, I'm curious if it changes the penalty.

It's cool if you're too busy to answer, since I'm absolutely certain this rule will never have to be applied to me in any fashion.

Can I have a clarification? Let's use this example - does the fact that he's fairly obviously being sarcastic change the severity of the penalty? I noticed that his reporting himself and offering to discontinue the practice if it was found to be in violation factored in the severity of the penalty (meaning you gave him some leeway). Did the sarcasm lessen the severity because it means he doesn't actually wish the poster harm? Of course, I realize either way it's not acceptable, I'm curious if it changes the penalty.

It's cool if you're too busy to answer, since I'm absolutely certain this rule will never have to be applied to me in any fashion.

Sarcasm definitely is a big factor in this one, because it could be taken as a straight up threat; however, that isn't the case here. Normally, a threat against another player would either be an automatic temp. forum ban (probably for a good amount of time) or an outright deletion, but in this case, he kind of took responsibility for what he said, deleted it, and reported it himself. The fact remains that he still posted it, but the punishment was lessened. In future action against Rotovia- (if any of his posts come up again), this certainly will be remembered and put into play.

Sarcasm definitely is a big factor in this one, because it could be taken as a straight up threat; however, that isn't the case here. Normally, a threat against another player would either be an automatic temp. forum ban (probably for a good amount of time) or an outright deletion, but in this case, he kind of took responsibility for what he said, deleted it, and reported it himself. The fact remains that he still posted it, but the punishment was lessened. In future action against Rotovia- (if any of his posts come up again), this certainly will be remembered and put into play.

Thanks for the clarification.

Isn't reporting yourself against the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights?

1. No, no it isn't.

2. This is the Internet. Your constitution is irrelevant.

Isn't reporting yourself against the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights?

Well whatever works for you.....
The Fifth Amendment to the Australian Constitution gives women the right to vote... so I won't be calling that one in anytime soon.