No consistency in application of insults rule

[Truth-Bringer]

When there's no consistency in the application of a rule, then it certainly appears that some mods are making decisions based on personal vendettas or some other emotional issue.

I was cited for calling another member "Einstein" - which, first of all, I would like for someone to explain how this is a proven insult. I have made the same comment to several other members over the last few months and no mod has ever cited this as an insult.

I'd just like to see a uniform application of the rules. Wouldn't that be fair?

[BillyBob]

Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer

I was cited for calling another member "Einstein" - which, first of all, I would like for someone to explain how this is a proven insult.

Hey Galileo, I think it's pretty obvious.

[sunnyside]

On the subject of consistancy it isn't like we pay mods to go through all the threads. You could probably have a thread that no mod even reads. Also different mods probably apply things differently.

However while not exactly scathing your comment was, technically, a personal insult.

[Truth-Bringer]

Originally Posted by sunnyside

However while not exactly scathing your comment was, technically, a personal insult.

I say it was a compliment. Prove it wasn't.

[raytri]

Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer

I'd just like to see a uniform application of the rules. Wouldn't that be fair?

It would be, but mods are a) volunteers, b) human and c) generally try to *avoid* modding posts.

As noted, not every mod sees every thread. And "when to mod" is more of a fuzzy grey area than a clear bright line. Sometimes an entire post is dripping with implied insults but lacks any specific name-calling. Sometimes there's a lot of low-level trash-talking, then someone comes along and ups the ante just enough to push their post over the perceived line.

One thing holds true, though: While we may not edit out every insult, whatever we do edit out is clearly an insult. So if you don't like being modded, the solution is pretty simple: don't toss out insults. The mods would all greatly prefer that this solution be used by everyone.

Meanwhile, you can be pretty confident that insult-modding, even if uneven in a given thread, works out in the end. In one thread, maybe you get modded more; in another thread, the other guy will. It's a grand symmetry of nature.

And finally, note how your post lost none of its punch or credibility when it lost its insults. Indeed, I'd argue a lack of insults increases credibility. So you lose nothing by not being able to call people names.

[justabubba]

Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer

When there's no consistency in the application of a rule, then it certainly appears that some mods are making decisions based on personal vendettas or some other emotional issue.

I was cited for calling another member "Einstein" - which, first of all, I would like for someone to explain how this is a proven insult. I have made the same comment to several other members over the last few months and no mod has ever cited this as an insult.

I'd just like to see a uniform application of the rules. Wouldn't that be fair?

ok, Einstein ... modded as an insult
you are no Einstein ... would that not be an insult, too

departing from the example and questioning the basis of your thread, is your concern that mods at large are inconsistent in rendering out the insults or is it that some mods are inconsistent in the application of insult critiques? if it is all mods, as i read your post, then no confirming response to this inquiry is expected. if it is specific mods then i would be interested in pursuing this concern further (off line if you prefer)

[GovernmentCheese]

Originally Posted by justabubba

ok, Einstein ... modded as an insult
you are no Einstein ... would that not be an insult, too

departing from the example and questioning the basis of your thread, is your concern that mods at large are inconsistent in rendering out the insults or is it that some mods are inconsistent in the application of insult critiques? if it is all mods, as i read your post, then no confirming response to this inquiry is expected. if it is specific mods then i would be interested in pursuing this concern further (off line if you prefer)

Can't we just all get a thong.......



laden...woman

[Truth-Bringer]

Originally Posted by justabubba

departing from the example and questioning the basis of your thread, is your concern that mods at large are inconsistent in rendering out the insults or is it that some mods are inconsistent in the application of insult critiques? if it is all mods, as i read your post, then no confirming response to this inquiry is expected. if it is specific mods then i would be interested in pursuing this concern further (off line if you prefer)

Well, both. All mods should be equally applying the rule. There rule should be designed so that no guesswork is allowed - that is the only way to insure uniformity. Certain words should be allowed, and certain words denied. If a word isn't a classic insult, then I don't see why one person's opinion should dictate what is or isn't an insult. And, really, this should be limited to school yard style insults.

As for specific mods, as you can see, catzmeow didn't show up in this thread. I think what's quite obvious is that this was a personal issue directed at me involving political differences.

The last alleged "insult" deleted on that post was "your master Bush" - again, that can't be proven as an insult. There is a completely logical argument that citizens are de facto slaves today and the politicians their ruling or master class. If you can debate a point, then simply declaring it an insult and issuing a warning isn't justified.

[catzmeow]

Trust me, it isn't personal. You forgot to mention that your post had numerous references (3, I think) to another poster's lack of intellect. It wasn't the Einstein comment that got you modded, but the other insults you made. I just cleaned up Einstein while I was there.

Why did that post get modded? Because the insults were completely unnecessary to the content of the post (which, quite clearly, I read), along with the largely respectful tone of the thread.

I don't remember, but I suspect another poster reported them to us as personal insults.

[catzmeow]

Why people get edited...

Original post:

i can't dumb it done to the point you can comprehend it
have your mom coach you in reading comprehension and then you can play with the big boys
until then, find a selection of picture books to entertain you, as that should prove less annoying ...

or maybe you feel able to tell us how a minority population which has been subject to discrimination would expect to achieve equality if no one asks the rights questions about indicators of inequality. doubt a picture book will help you with that, but wanted to tender the offer should you want to step up and actually comment on the topic at hand ... either way i will welcome your insipid response - but only to humor you

No names, but can anyone count the number of personal insults in this specific post? I count 5. Personal vendetta? Or, unwillingness of some members to follow forum rules? You tell me.