That's your view. Experience suggest to me that they will probably have a different view. Speaking for myself as mod, I'd allow it without judgement included under the umbrella of personal attack.

If they agreed then I'd allow it even if we didn't allow personal attacks. I'd assume that was the case with the LGBT example.

WOW, this forum's getting so dumb it's making my brain hurt. What's left of it anyway.

What's my view? Who are the they who will probably have a different view? I have no idea what, or who, you are referring to here.

Let's make this real simple.

I'm a Red Sox fan. That's a US MLB baseball team. IYO, would it be "personal attack" to call me a "baseball fan"? If so, why? If not, why not?

We're not allowed to talk about FoldnRape's self-admitted crimes because he's on cheezelawg's good side?

It's been discussed at length before and we could have a very detailed discussion about the difference between calling an arsenal supporter a football fan and calling an LTer a racist. In the end it boils down to whether it's the sort of thing that's viewed as an insult.

Yeah, but who ****ing cares?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb

So again, I'm perfectly good with personal attacks being allowed, so long as they're allowed in a content neutral fashion. If some drooling cultists want to call me a racist, rapist, child molester, nazi etc, then I can respond in turn.

[QUOTE=TiltedDonkey;52429773]In this case, the topic happens to be personal attacks, you murdering rapist kidnapper drug dealer.



I have never been CONVICTED of any of those crimes sir

We shouldn't talk about Foldn's rapey comments in out of context situations, but when he brings it up himself Chez shouldn't wiggle his finger at us. If anything he needs to tell Foldn to STFU or dealwithit.gif when people bring up his past.

Accusation more specifically describes the category of speech in question than personal attack. Accusations of criminality are a more specific next category which fits.

So within accusations of criminality, what standard to spread news of a person's criminality is allowed by the qualifiers in the site wide rules? High.

Viewed by who? The ACers called everyone else 'statist's, and they clearly meant it as an insult. Today's deplorables call lots of folks Communists y/o socialists (who aren't out-of-the-closet either).

Is this all the same? Or is the r-word especially 'special' ??

What if someone was called someone else a "Institutional Racist". Is that ever a "personal attack" ??

In these forums you are guilty until proven innocent.

That's the 2plus2 justice system.

Generally viewed as an insult by the people on the receiving end is sufficient. Its probably the only thing that matters in practice.

Yes, this, exactly this.

Again, this case is somewhat unique as I'm pretty certain the actions being discussed have been admitted to, in this forum by Fold'n.

It's not really an accusation, it's an interpretation.

Exactly it's an interpretation and a mod should not be judging whether in their opinion it's the correct interpretation or not.

That's why I'd allow it if we were discussing the post in its original context ie when interpretation is directly part of the discussion. But posters are not going to target other posters with their interpretations when it comes to a serious crime.

and that is an excuse to behave torturous, abusive, slanderous towards a person if they do not interpret their own post and life event they shared that particular way. And you can say that is an interpretation too. Then it's more of a repeated assertion than an interpretation.

Here is an interpretation. that was a trap for foldn's political adversaries who now can't produce even an arrest certificate. They just have a post on the internet luls. Whatever.

So, it's a matter of the Special Snowflakes getting special treatment. Since nobody was insulted when the ACers called others 'statists', or now that the deplorables sometimes call others Communists y/o socialists, it's basically no-harm-no-foul. Good luck with that.

But, you're not answering my real question.

What's the work-around we can use to, for example, point out LTers are r-word-ers, without "triggering" them with what they'll perceive as an insult ??

I get kerlol, but why is 18ball an insult?

I'm gonna brainstorm you some better ones:

-13ball
12ball
1.3ball
13ballsINHISMOUTH!
MS-13ball
PMS-13ball (I really like this one.)
0ballz
2ballz,butreallysmallones
Bakersdozenball
No_Jetski_Jimmy

(You get a little biographical info on that last one.)

There's no workaround but you don't need a workaround under the current rules do you? If racist is an allowable personal attack then you're good to go even if you disagree about it being a personal attack.

If the forum goes another route of no personal attacks then we can revisit it in more detail.

Uh huh. And these hourly rule changes that cater only to the SMP crew, will we get updates somewhere or do we need to check this thread to stay up to date?

Well it's a good thing you don't need to interpret it then, you just need to refrain from moderating discussion of it.

chez, for ****'s sake, this is ridiculous. Fold'n is the one who brought this up in this thread.

Dude you barely speak English but I'm going to do my best here.

1. torturous: I do not agree that really any posting on a message board can be considered torturous to anyone, with the possible exception of severely mentally ill individuals.

2. abusive: I kind of agree that posting excessively about it when it is not relevant is "abusive", but in this instance he brought it up.

3. slanderous: Again, the events are not disputed so you are going to have a tough time arguing this is "slanderous".

Also, I don't remember the details of Foldn's questionable sexual conduct, and so I am not in a position myself to comment on whether I think it was a rape or not but lol at describing it as a "life event" that he gets to interpret as he chooses.

It's both.

What? What the hell does this mean? Like:

1. I don't think anyone here was trying to get him arrested.

2. Does the lack of an arrest somehow imply a crime was not committed in your mind?

FoldN is a holocaust denying rapist and he's chezlaw's only friend lol

And how does a reasonable person interpret this as violence? I mean, 2outs says conservatism is going to die out. Does that not constitute the same sort of wishful thinking? Of course it does. Where exactly does violence get implied?

It was a "good" attempt on your part. "Best" of luck accusing folks of rape and other criminal stuff.