Subject:
|
Re: Seriously...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:26:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
386 times
|
| |
|
|
John wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> > >
> > > > The only issue for me was the 'colourful language'.
> > >
> > > Of course! What {else} are we talking about????
> > >
> > > [JOHN]
> >
> > "
> > Nothing to follow. Jon expressed an opinion, and a rather benign one at that.
> > Is this grounds for banishment? And even if insulting is grounds for
> > banishment, I personally have endured countless personal attacks at the hands
> > of RM; far worse than this! RM?s leash is far and away longer than anyone
> > else?s on LUGNET, and his latest attack on Jon is IMO the lowest point to
> > which LUGNET has ever descended. His disdain for everything this community
> > stands for is contemptible. "
>
> What I was responding to there was Tom's assertion that {Jon} be suspended as
> well. [I] questioned whether insults were {really} grounds for reprimand for if
> they were, RM has been guilty [numerous] times in the past without consequence
> (long leash).
I don't follow RM from group to group like you may, but his insults SEEM TO ME to be
confined to .debate. As you know (or if you don't, it's time to leave, you really
are as clueless as RM states), .debate has a different level/tolerance of "abuse"
than any other part of Lugnet. There's a reason posts to .debate do not appear on
the front page of news.lugnet.
> > No mention of the colourful language, but the 'disdain for everything this
> > community stands for', directed as a blanket statement to Richard's postings
> > in general.
>
> No, what I meant was his {willful} use of vile language {in this particular
> post} in this family forum was tantamount to flipping off the entire community.
> And worse, he is not concrite in the least, and arrogantly so. These little
> rules by which we all agree to play (civility chiefly among them) are beneath
> him.
I have no problem with banishing RM. He clearly broke the ToU.
> > 'RM's leash'--up till this point, RM has had the same 'leash' as everyone
> > else. There was no usage of foul language up 'till this point, and he got
> > 'reeled in' for the usage.
>
> And that brings me back to my initial point with Tom. If Jon's little barb is
> grounds for punishment, RM should have been punished [many] times previously but
> wasn't.
If RM has been using barbs outside of .debate, I agree. Jon's comments were more
than a "little barb" AFAIAC.
He deserves a day or 2 of banishment for making a critique of TLG's decision a
personal attack and egging RM on.
> RM's utter contempt for this community by his {purposeful} use of forbidden
> language in his ugly invective is what finally got him suspended.
Which I have no problem with. I do have a problem with Jon getting absolutely
nothing out of this, though. It's not like it was confined within .debate.
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Seriously...
|
| (...) With the possible exception of .rtltoronto! - Chris "Oh, you're looking for an argument? This is Abuse. Arguments are the third door on the left." (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Seriously...
|
| (...) (snip) (...) (snip) (...) Okay, Tom, I think I see your point now. Your issue is that the entire exchange took place outside of .debate. So you think that Jon's comment would have been fine in .debate, not not outside of it (where it occured). (...) (21 years ago, 22-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Seriously...
|
| (...) What I was responding to there was Tom's assertion that Jon be suspended as well. I questioned whether insults were really grounds for reprimand for if they were, RM has been guilty numerous times in the past without consequence (long leash). (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
