Color me confused.

SenaxFlatulus just gigged me a point for calling someone a "Chickenhawk." That is the established term for someone who supports the war but refuses to sign up and go himself. Cheney is a "chickenhawk". Rove is a "chickenhawk." So, in my humble estimation, is the person who I called by this not particularly offensive appelation.

So, as a relatively new person on this forum, perhaps the mods might do me a big favor and explain what constitutes an actual "insult."

Does it depend on the mod's political POV? Does a conservative mod bust someone for calling someone a "chickenhawk" where a liberal or moderate wouldn't raise an eyebrow?

I would be very happy to see an actual policy on what constitutes an insult, because I see things in here EVERY DAY that COULD be construed as such but don't get gigged.

Thank you.

__________________
Let's see which attack angle will work:

Trying to tie 8 year old Barack Obama to William Ayers.

...or...

Trying to tie 50 year old John McCain to the savings and loan scandal and following his mavericky path of deregulation for all his time in Congress.

Hmmmmmmmm, what will voters care more about??

www.keatingeconomics.com

No idea.

But hey, Chickenhead! ..this thread belongs in the ForumHelp/Feedback Section.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

Please, let's not be disingenuous about the root origins of that term. The implication is that someone is a "chicken?" Do you consider that a flattering appellation with positive connotations?

Now you're just being silly, TJO. You love us when we're defending you from the XM frenzy, but you feel free to insult other users on this forum with these kinds of terms? And, to attack one of our new mods with impunity? And to call into question the objectivity of the mods?

Think again. This behavior is no way to win friends and influence people.

__________________
Catz Meow
Badly behaved.
Hedonistic Lemming.

************************************************** ***
JW Frogen, my new favorite noob poster:

If you are such a weak jellyfish you can be bullied on a forum where you can ignore any poster you do not want to read than I suggest you move to Tibet, convert to Buddhism, protest the Chinese occupation, be killed as you will by the Chinese and hope you come back with some form of backbone.

From the rules:

Quote:

Avoid personal attacks. This is probably the most subjective of guidelines; however, approach it like this: ATTACK THE MESSAGE, NOT THE MESSENGER. Many topics are emotionally charged. This passion for what one believes in should remain in the discourse. However, please refrain from attacking another user in a personal way. Personal attacks do not contribute to a debate. While you may attack a user's ideas, views, political affiliation, political party, political candidate, government, etc... you must not attack the poster personally. Those who engage in this may get a private warning, a public warning, or even have their posting deleted. Continued disregard towards this guideline may result in being banned from this board.

Read them. Learn them. Live them.

You've seen the rules. I know you've been directed to them before by other mods. We expect users to exercise at least enough adult thinking capacity to avoid insulting other users. This isn't rocket science. And no, there isn't a list of prohibited insults. We know them when we see them...and 99.9% of the time, so do the users here.

__________________
Catz Meow
Badly behaved.
Hedonistic Lemming.

************************************************** ***
JW Frogen, my new favorite noob poster:

If you are such a weak jellyfish you can be bullied on a forum where you can ignore any poster you do not want to read than I suggest you move to Tibet, convert to Buddhism, protest the Chinese occupation, be killed as you will by the Chinese and hope you come back with some form of backbone.

If you attack a user's message you're good to go... no problem.

If you attack them, even if you explain how valid that attack is, it's still an attack.

The act of attacking your opponent takes debate off the table and turns it into a common argument. Your post should focus on their ideas, their theories, their views, their statements, etc...

Once you focus on them with offhand comments about how they remind you of someone at your old forum, or just them as a person... you've derailed your own argument and forced them to either defend themselves personally, or abandon the thread.

BTW... I've done it myself many times. We're all human. Just pick yourself up, dust yourself off, refocus your effort on your goal of debating your ideas.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

First of all, you have no way of knowing what gets gigged or not. We don't always edit. The post you're referring to has not been edited, in fact. So stop assuming - you stink at it. Actually, you're very good at it; you're just always wrong.


Name-calling is almost always gonna be moderated if we see it. Perhaps you think we read every word of every post, but that's not true.


We don't work for you. We don't work for the site owner. We volunteered because we like the forum and want to help it thrive.


So y'all came to the forum and looked around said, "Hey! This looks like a fun place. They don't let people insult one another. I think I'll stay."


"But, this guy's a racist. Surely, it must be OK to insult him. And this guy said mean things about gays. He must be fair game also. Oh no. Here's one who wished terrible things would happen to Barack. I can't let him get away with it." IOW, free speech should be allowed until you say so.


A grown up will realize that when a person says certain things - it says more about them than it does about their topic. Even a lying racist homophobe Barack hater will be right sometimes. He can be every one of those things and it doesn't make the slightest dent in his argument. Y'all beg for posters to stick to issues, then resort to ad hominems at the first opportunity. You recognize when someone calls Barack a ugly name, but fail to see or hear the same when it comes from your own keyboard, because you are justified.


Understand, you can call Cheney or any other politician a chickenhawk all day long and nothing will happen to you. It's just an opinion and worth as much as anybody else's. Not nearly as much as you think.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.