NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9795843&postcount=70

Telling someone to "piss off" because they say something you disagree with sounds like a (admittedly mild) flame to me.

people are reporting others for a "pis off" now?:eek:

Oh come ON now, Sarzonia. You are really stretching with that one. What's with this recent crusade-like spurt lately anyways? I mean really, you admit 'piss off' is an 'admittedly mild' thing, but feel the need to report it, when the subject of the poster's ire hasn't batted an eye?

Seriously, now. That's just getting silly. And it sounds horribly like "Mommy, Timmy just told someone else to piss off, and I HEARD IT!"

I'd like to think we're a bit more grown up than all that here. Now if he'd said "You're a fucking moron for disagreeing with me, and ought to be drug out into the street and shot on account" or the like, y'all might have something there. But a simple 'piss off'?

Gracious.

I agree. The tolerance and skin of people on these forums has taken a nose-dive since a year ago when I joined. I think a sticky or something should be created saying what is something that should be reported, and what isn't. If there is, than I apologize, it just seems like there isn't. I think a lot of people here need to mature a little bit.

Everyone else summed it up pretty nicely. Too mild to be actionable.

I agree. The tolerance and skin of people on these forums has taken a nose-dive since a year ago when I joined. I think a sticky or something should be created saying what is something that should be reported, and what isn't. If there is, than I apologize, it just seems like there isn't. I think a lot of people here need to mature a little bit.

Er...I disagree. Modding forum complaints isn't about blanket rules, per se. Granted, some phrases are always going to be unacceptable in any contest. But, I suppose, an especially venomous 'piss off' could be construed as a flame. I don't think it is so in this case.

Frankly, I think the mods have better things to do than create an encyclopedia of what is permitted and what is not. Genuine complaints would have to be judged on context and intent, not on whether they matched with Section 2, Paragraph C of 'Naughty Words'. Furthermore, it would be setting down absolute laws, which would lead to rules lawyering, and which in any case has never been the way moderation is done. I haven't ever seen anything like this on any other forum, and I don't see why NS is different.

In fact, creating such a list wouldn't encourage people to grow skins: it would, on the contrary, lead them to pick at everything in case there were a violation. I think it's better that we get on with roleplaying, debating or whatever, and just try to use some common sense in terms of what is outright offensive, and what can be shrugged off. I'm not always one to talk in such matters, but here I think the suggestion of greater codification of laws is very dangerous.

For what it's worth, I think - and I seem to be agreeing with others - that this was hardly noticeable, and almost certainly not officially actionable. But there will be times when the judgement is finer: in such instances, it is context and intent that have to be used to discern the conclusion. A 'rulebook sticky' would detract from and potentially stifle that.

I agree. The tolerance and skin of people on these forums has taken a nose-dive since a year ago when I joined. I think a sticky or something should be created saying what is something that should be reported, and what isn't. If there is, than I apologize, it just seems like there isn't. I think a lot of people here need to mature a little bit.

Not possible. We have to take many things into account, such as who the person in question it responding to (or the group they're poking fun at), their history of posts against that specific poster/group and their previous interactions, their past warnings (if any), and countless other things. It's best to take things case by case.

The mods are like Judges. Relying on common law precedents as well as the established iron clad rules to make their decisions. Because of the variety of differing circumstances they often need to be able to look at matters on a strictly case by case basis, so a sticky would serve noone.