Question Concerning Behavior And Rules

[moritheil]

I'm confused by something that happened recently, so I'm posting here to see what exactly the rules call for.

Two people were arguing over something, and one person stated that they could prove their argument was correct. I posted stating that I could understand the two had different opinions, but I was surprised that one of them would go so far as to suggest that they could be proved correct (which is rare on forums.) They posted providing this "proof," which was no proof at all, and I said as much. I was rewarded for my curiosity with a snippy remark about how the poster didn't have to prove herself (?) to the likes of me, and that if she believed her evidence, that was good enough for her. I replied that that really wasn't proof, and further explained my viewpoint on the matter.

At this point, Mouseferatu came on talking about how we were messing with the thread, accused us both of sniping, and declared that if we didn't cut it out, he was going to have to call mods to lock it. I was genuinely confused, but went back to the titlular topic. The thread had meandered a few times before, but no one had been yelling about things being off-topic then.

So, I came to the meta boards to try to find out if I'd done anything wrong. I found no direct mention of whether or not asking someone to prove something they said they could prove is within the rules, but I did find this thread: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=145525

In that thread, someone posts an observation that pointing out a logical inconsistency can be seen as a personal attack. He is not contradicted by the many subsequent posters. As you can imagine, this has not helped my confusion any.

1. Is it really considered a personal attack if you simply point out that someone is not logically consistent, or has said something patently false? I've posted hundreds of times quoting the SRD and telling people to their face that they were dead wrong (in the Rules forum) and never thought that it could be considered a personal attack. I have also, on a related note, attempted to show faulty logic, and never considered that it could be a personal attack. The issue is the assertion, and not the person making it.

2. Is it a personal attack if you ask someone their explanation for making a grievous error? I do this when I want to know if I should simply ignore future posts by that person. The response someone gives when they are asked this very often indicates whether or not their future posts are likely to be worth reading, or if they are going to be wildly inaccurate, full of drivel, or the like in the future as well as in that particular thread.

I attempted to contact one mod to ask my questions directly, but he did not respond to AIM.

The thread that I speak of that kicked off my rules-searching was this one.

Thanks for any light you can shed on exactly what constitutes proper behavior on EN World.

 

[Aaron L]

Its a personal attack when suggest that the person you are having a dissagrement with may have a mental disability, yes indeed. I've been quite disturbed by the increasing levels of jackassery I've been seeing on the boards of late.

In fact, I came to the Meta boards to make just such an observation, but seeing as this thread is already started, it saves me a bit of typing, and I am such a lazy so-and-so.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Use the report post buttom and just say; please look this over - I think it is out of line. Let the mod look into it, you have to step back because you have a vested interested in what is being said and yes that affects your judgement and comments, you don't have to keep adding fuel to a fire.

There are other things you can do, like post: lets take this off-line.

 

[moritheil]

Its a personal attack when suggest that the person you are having a dissagrement with may have a mental disability, yes indeed. I've been quite disturbed by the increasing levels of jackassery I've been seeing on the boards of late.

In fact, I came to the Meta boards to make just such an observation, but seeing as this thread is already started, it saves me a bit of typing, and I am such a lazy so-and-so.

I asked because it falls within the range of possible reasons for stating that you can prove something, being asked nicely to prove it, and being instantly and disproportionately hostile towards the one who asks when it turns out that you can't. You will note that I stated it as one of several possibilities that spanned that range. Furthermore, the purpose of the question, as I have stated above, is to observe the response.

While I appreciate the comments from well-intentioned EN World posters, this post is in fact directed at Moderators, and I await their word.

 

[Umbran]

I asked because it falls within the range of possible reasons for stating that you can prove something, being asked nicely to prove it, and being instantly and disproportionately hostile towards the one who asks when it turns out that you can't.

The thing is, in a text-only medium, "nicely" is kind of in the eye of the beholder, rather than the author. What you intend to be nice can read as an aggressive confrontation to another. Or, it can be read as nice, but deliberate baiting. Or, it can be read as nice, but unintentionally confrontational or baiting. So, on occasion, doggedly seeking proof can be seen as... impolite.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Obviously I am not a moderator, so you don't care about my opinion, but I feel like stating it anyway.

Looking at the thread in question, I completely agree with Mouseferatu. The sniping wasn't about proof, it was what appear to be personal attacks within those posts. Both you and the other party engaged in comments like:

"Are all your opinions so ill-founded?"

and

"Now, is English not your first language, do you have a disability, or did you mistype?"

That is where it crossed the line IMHO.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Obviously I am not a moderator, so you don't care about my opinion, but I feel like stating it anyway.

Looking at the thread in question, I completely agree with Mouseferatu. The sniping wasn't about proof, it was what appear to be personal attacks within those posts. Both you and the other party engaged in comments like:

"Are all your opinions so ill-founded?"

and

"Now, is English not your first language, do you have a disability, or did you mistype?"

That is where it crossed the line IMHO.

This is it entirely. We don't care so much if a thread drifts. Personal attacks are not allowed. Please remember to treat other posters as if you were them.

 

[Umbran]

If what Thornir quotes is an accurate description of the thread in question, then any "nicely" worded things were sure to get lost amongst things that were not so nice at all.

 

[moritheil]

This is it entirely. We don't care so much if a thread drifts. Personal attacks are not allowed. Please remember to treat other posters as if you were them.

Okay, I get that there is apparently some widespread stigma associated with being disabled, dyslexic, or the like, and thus my query should have been better worded. I do not get where exactly and precisely the line is between honest question and personal attack. Based on posts above, it seems to be a nebulous matter of whether or not, in theory, someone might possibly find something offensive. What is offensive to some people is not at all offensive to others. Whose standards should I use, if not my own?

If Bob goes running around in public with a bowl of ice cream dumped on his head, my common-sense understanding is that anyone who points this out is merely acting naturally. I would not suspect them of harboring ill will towards Bob in particular, of "sniping" at him verbally, or anything of the sort. I would not imagine that he had any particular right to blame others for pointing, staring, and wondering aloud if he was pulling a prank, drunk, mentally ill, etc. because his actions would clearly be so far from normal behavior that such questions would naturally arise in a frank consideration of the matter.

So how does it work on the forums? Is the proper answer, when confronted with ice cream Bob, to simply smile and talk about the weather? Is it permitted to point? To laugh? To address the issue of his wearing ice cream directly?

If someone does something blatantly incorrect, is it wrong to point this out or question them? Or does civility trump truth, logic, inquisitiveness, and sense? How far should one be willing to go to avoid the possibility of offending someone, no matter how remote it might seem in any one instance?

 

[Crothian]

Whose standards should I use, if not my own?

Morrus' standards. They are his boards and his rules.