NationStates Jolt Archive


Baiting

Neo Art
14-07-2008, 16:40
A little backstory:

In this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=557837) I reported a poster for inappropriately making reference to my private life. Mod ruling was that such conduct could be considered "borderline bating".

In this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=559579) I reported the same poster for what I viewed as essentially bating, commenting "Sounds like Neo Art gets to be wrong." in the OP of a thread about the second amendment. To that thread it was ruled by Ardchoille that "Forum regulars get to know each other's stances on a variety of topics, including gun control." and that merely making reference to what you believe is a poster's position, in a relevant thread, was not baiting.

However it was also ruled that "If a poster developed a pattern of singling out another for abuse or baiting over several threads it would be actionable, but in this case I don't think such a pattern exists yet." which suggests that such conduct may rise to a violation if it was done across threads, and that while that reported thread may be in and of itself not a violation, could be considered as something in totality.

With that in mind I point to this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13834989&postcount=224) and renew my same objection that it is, essentially, bating. And while I respect the earlier ruling, I point out that not only is this continued conduct which may, if taken in totality, give rise to an inference of bad conduct, but it was also done in a thread totally off the subject of his post. Coming in and saying "you were wrong about the second amendment" in a post having nothing at all to do with the second amendment does seem, to me, when taken in consideration of the history recounted above, as bating.

Moderators only, please
Wilgrove
14-07-2008, 18:45
Here's some more to help out Neo. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13835426&postcount=26)
Neo Art
14-07-2008, 20:01
and again (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13835750&postcount=46)
Hotwife
14-07-2008, 20:15
In order to invalidate your points, it's fair to point out where you have been terribly wrong before.

It's a fair thing to say, since you say it about me to discredit what I post.
Hotwife
14-07-2008, 20:17
It's also not baiting since it is quite true that you were completely wrong about the Second Amendment, even though you proclaim that you are a lawyer and a legal expert.

To show how discredited your opinion is is not baiting, and is only the truth.
Ardchoille
15-07-2008, 03:55
Hotwife, it's now baiting. Cut it out.

I am not ruling on the correctness of your opinion, or Neo Art's, about American law.

Nor am I ruling about a remark by a new poster who has no history with another poster.

Regular posters get to know each other's opinions. They also get to know what buttons to press to provoke each other. Deliberately pressing one of those buttons across a series of unrelated threads is baiting.

There is a thin line between friendly teasing and unfriendly teasing -- baiting -- and you may not previously have been aware that you had crossed it. But to repeat the remark in the very thread in which the complaint is lodged is, at the very least, disingenuous.

However, now you are aware. Any further instances will be treated as they deserve.

Neo Art, it seems likely to me that the subject of the Second Amendment will come up again in General. I am not forbidding Hotwife to comment on it. I am forbidding you both to revisit your previous exchanges on the subject.