Question Concerning Behavior And Rules

[moritheil]

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.

Okay, my question regarding his actions is - as a normal poster, does Mouseferatu have the authority to demand such things? Does his threat to involve the Mods constitute normal, expected behavior, or is it itself considered somewhat belligerent? I certainly think it's plausible to read at least as much hostility towards others in his post as in any other post there, possibly even more. Should I go around threatening to involve the mods and telling people to knock it off whenever I read something I find offensive? Should I automatically flag it for Mods to read? Because if so, then I should have been flagging scores of threads in the Rules forums for Mods involvement. That means I've been seriously neglecting my duties in that regard, in which case I apologize.

 

[moritheil]

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

I'm posting here because I don't understand his standards precisely. His rules post, which I have read a few times, includes a very nice and general admonition to be civil. Where the disconnect occurs is where I don't think I've been terribly rude - maybe just careless in wording, but not terribly rude - and others think I have been terribly rude. For that matter, it's also entirely possible that I find things such as being blatantly lied to by others incredibly insulting, and other people don't give it a second thought. In such instances, my default assumption has thus far been "If a mod didn't pop in and yell at someone for it, I guess it's not against the code here, so I'll just suck it up."

What I am getting from everyone's posts here is that civility has no actual definition, and if I think someone is being uncivil, they are, no matter what they think. Conversely, if someone insists that they feel offended by my post, it is offensive, regardless of what my original intent was. Is this the case?

 

[Morrus]

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?

Asking if someone is mentally disabled is not one of those nebulous or vague things, or even close to it. It's not even something that needs explaining. I would suggest that if your standards are so different to everyone else's that you don't see that, then you might find posting here to be something of a challenge. I'm not entirely sure what we can do to make that easier for you.

 

[Dinkeldog]

I would like to first point out that the proper response is to e-mail the moderator in question or report the moderator's post to get further clarification. However, there have been a number of issues in the past couple weeks (these things seem to run in cycles), so I wanted to take an opportunity for an object lesson.

Here is the original post in question:

Look, let's get something straight here - if you say something so strongly and boldly as you did above, I believe you ought to mean it. So if you say "demonstrable," I expect demonstrable. Not "Oh, I totally believe it, though I have no proof that would convince a skeptic." That is not the meaning of demonstrable.

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

If you had stopped after your first paragraph, you would have made your point fully (or nearly fully). The obvious problem is in the second paragraph. If it were worded simply, "Did you mistype?" there would have been no issue. But you are implying something about the poster that is quite pejorative. That is the specific something that we do not appreciate at ENWorld.

 

[Crothian]

What I am getting from everyone's posts here is that civility has no actual definition, and if I think someone is being uncivil, they are, no matter what they think. Conversely, if someone insists that they feel offended by my post, it is offensive, regardless of what my original intent was. Is this the case?

Civility has definition. Don't call people names, don't be rude, don't use subtle or non subtle insults. And if you don't get that what you said was all of that then ...I don't know what then, but you won't have an easy time being here if that's the case.

If someone finds something offensive, they should report it to the mods. In the report a post fuinction they can explain why it was offensive to them. It is the mods that really decide if something is offensive. If it is offensive, don't reply to it, just report it. Many offensive statements if ignored go away. Its really when people respoind and then trhings start to esculate that things go really bad.

 

[moritheil]

I started this thread before moderators said anything about that particular exchange. As such, there was no one moderator I associated with it. I looked at the mods list and attempted to contact you over AIM, because you were on at the time, but unfortunately I did not get a response.

I would like to first point out that the proper response is to e-mail the moderator in question or report the moderator's post to get further clarification. However, there have been a number of issues in the past couple weeks (these things seem to run in cycles), so I wanted to take an opportunity for an object lesson.

Here is the original post in question:

If you had stopped after your first paragraph, you would have made your point fully (or nearly fully). The obvious problem is in the second paragraph. If it were worded simply, "Did you mistype?" there would have been no issue. But you are implying something about the poster that is quite pejorative. That is the specific something that we do not appreciate at ENWorld.

Do I understand you correctly that being dyslexic - a disability that could lead a poster to post incorrect words - is a shameful thing, and that therefore any question of it is inherently insulting? Do I further understand correctly that asking someone if English is not their first language is itself inherently and automatically insulting?

 

[moritheil]

Asking if someone is mentally disabled is not one of those nebulous or vague things, or even close to it. It's not even something that needs explaining. I would suggest that if your standards are so different to everyone else's that you don't see that, then you might find posting here to be something of a challenge. I'm not entirely sure what we can do to make that easier for you.

I had a teacher who was dyslexic, which he often frankly admitted was a mental disability. He often used words in place of those he intended to use. There was no stigma or shame anyone associated with this condition. In the situation above, there was a real possibility that someone had mistyped. My statement of that is apparently not offensive. Is it the fact that I briefly went into speculation of the reasons someone mistyped that is offensive?

I don't mean to be combative or to argue with you, but I do wish to understand things. What other issues should I never mention or ask of someone?

 

[Crothian]

Do I understand you correctly that being dyslexic - a disability that could lead a poster to post incorrect words - is a shameful thing, and that therefore any question of it is inherently insulting? Do I further understand correctly that asking someone if English is not their first language is itself inherently and automatically insulting?

Being dyslexic is not shameful or anything.

Calling someone dyslexic who very well may not be is insultive. Basically, it seems that what they said is so messed up to you, that the only way it could have happened is if they are dyslexic, non english speaker, or messed up. Its like that what they said could not have been done on purpose so there has to be some underlying reason for the mistake. It is very dismissive and again insulting.

 

[Morrus]

I don't mean to be combative or to argue with you, but I do wish to understand things. What other issues should I never mention or ask of someone?

You're seriously asking me to list everything that anybody could say that would be regarded as impolite? I'm afraid I can't do that!

Unfortunately, it appears that you just don't see these things the same way as the rest of us.
Basic civility is something which most people naturally understand, but not something I think I can explain to you in depth. Half of me thinks you're just pretending not to understand (for whatever reason), because I am finding hard to believe that you don't get it. If you honestly don't get it, I honestly don't know what I can do to make it clearer to you.

I'm not trying to be awkward here, I'm just confounded by your situation, and don't feel qualified to help you out with it.

 

[Kelleris]

I had a teacher who was dyslexic, which he often frankly admitted was a mental disability. He often used words in place of those he intended to use. There was no stigma or shame anyone associated with this condition. In the situation above, there was a real possibility that someone had mistyped. My statement of that is apparently not offensive. Is it the fact that I briefly went into speculation of the reasons someone mistyped that is offensive?

If they actually were dyslexic, or mentally disabled, or whatever, then it's not pejorative. It's saying that they type like someone with a mental problem that's a problem, and saying such will make most people who do not in fact have some sort of disability pretty cranky, since it tells them that you think they are a) distinctly substandard in mental functioning and b) without a legitimate reason to explain such a thing. That's tantamount to just calling someone a moron.

(EDIT: Crothian beat me to the same point.)