Banned from politics forum

Palmach

I'd like the ban reversed. First off a mod warns me about "racism" when another moderator was saying the same thing and thin I got banned. The reason seems to me to be totally contrived and has more to do with my views than what was said.

You called a poster ignorant and called those who supported the Brotherhood "useful idiots."

Sorry mate that is crap. You are banning me because of my views. The poster was ignorant and I posted a link to show why he was ignorant of the topic at hand. T call some ignorant is not "insulting" if it is true.

The term useful idiot is widely used in political discourse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
It originates from a quote from Lenin
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...Useful%20idiot

Now please unban me because this is the most contrived effort to shut someone up I have seen in a while.

nesf

Original post quoted and my ban message: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70505397&postcount=93

Reason for ban: Combination of calling a poster ignorant while calling all those who supported or had sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt "useful idiots." Useful idiots is a phrase indeed but I'm really not sure how to interpret as anything other than an insult.

General rule I enforce on Politics: indirect insults are treated as being direct insults for the purposes of bans and infractions.


I am not going to be acting as a CMod in this thread due to being the moderator in question and will not have any contact with the other CMods during this process about this matter.

Palmach

nesf wrote: »

Original post quoted and my ban message: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70505397&postcount=93

Reason for ban: Combination of calling a poster ignorant while calling all those who supported or had sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt "useful idiots." Useful idiots is a phrase indeed but I'm really not sure how to interpret as anything other than an insult.

General rule I enforce on Politics: indirect insults are treated as being direct insults for the purposes of bans and infractions.
.

An indirect insult covers a multitude. It sounds like someone has a get out for ticking off opinions he doesn't like.

Calling someone ignorant cannot be wrong if they are ignorant. They may feel insulted but if they are found out to be wrong that is their problem.

I would also have thought that a mod on a politics forum would be familiar with the widely used phrase "useful idiot"

Dades

In moderation decisions I have always treated calling somebody ignorant an insult. (Monstrous ignorance even more so).

Yes, technically, they may in fact be ignorant on issues that are in question, however the wording never ceases to insult if you are on the receiving end of it.
There are always other ways of getting your point across without crossing the line.

Imagine someone was fat. It may technically be true, and it may be their fault, but that doesn't mean it's not an insult to tell them they are.

Palmach

Dades wrote: »

In moderation decisions I have always treated calling somebody ignorant an insult. (Monstrous ignorance even more so).

Yes, technically, they may in fact be ignorant on issues that are in question, however the wording never ceases to insult if you are on the receiving end of it.
There are always other ways of getting your point across without crossing the line.

Imagine someone was fat. It may technically be true, and it may be their fault, but that doesn't mean it's not an insult to tell them they are.

So if I called them clueless it would be ok? Means the same thing. Calling someone fat is a comment on their physical appearance. Calling some ignorant on a particular issue merely refers to their lack of knowledge of the issue at hand. I have used the word ignorant on many fora and have never ever had a problem with it. Certainly a seven day ban is utterly excessive.

nesf

For reference: a seven day ban is standard practice for abuse. I never give a ban less than seven days in length, so you got the minimal ban that I hand out for offences in general.

(I'm not going to argue with you in this thread, my contributions will solely be to clarify points where it is necessary)

Palmach

nesf wrote: »

For reference: a seven day ban is standard practice for abuse. I never give a ban less than seven days in length, so you got the minimal ban that I hand out for offences in general.

(I'm not going to argue with you in this thread, my contributions will solely be to clarify points where it is necessary)

You banned for nothing. The idea of banning someone for using the word ignorant in context is absurd especially justifying by saying indirect insult. Here it is used by a reputable newspaper USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-02-24-toyota-hearings_N.htm
Look at the headline. Are they insulting the head of Toyota?


You also used the words useful idiots as an excuse for a ban not knowing that is a perfectly legitimate phrase to use.

Dades

"Ignorance" is a not a neutral word. The head of Toyota is admitting to ignorance to avoid overall responsibility.

It's all in the context. If someone declared that you showed a monstrous ignorance of a topic on which you were discussing, your reaction would not be positive. You may have a thicker skin than some, but I can see the pov of someone who might take offence.

This isn't the first time I've had this conversation and not the first time I'm disinclined to change my opinion.
Afaic, your comment crossed the line.

Palmach

Dades wrote: »

It's all in the context. If someone declared that you showed a monstrous ignorance of a topic on which you were discussing, your reaction would not be positive. You may have a thicker skin than some, but I can see the pov of someone who might take offence.

This isn't the first time I've had this conversation and not the first time I'm disinclined to change my opinion.
Afaic, your comment crossed the line.

You obviously have never done any public speaking. I have heard the word ignorant used before and the person concerned took no offense. The debates may have been heated but political debate usually is unless it is some kind of Quaker convention. Also you are falling into the rap of letting people decide when they are offended or not. It would a handy ploy for people to shut other people up they don't like. Offense, as long as it is not deliberate, in discussion is part and parcel of debate. Judging by your over sensitive standards nobody would read a paper or listen to the radio as they'd be offended.

here is more use of the I word in Irish political discourse
http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/politics/adams-ignorant-of-economics-claims-fine-gael-143260.html

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-94446080.html

http://www.tribune.ie/news/editorial-opinion/article/2010/dec/19/diarmuid-doyle-gerry-adams-is-an-incorrigible-cant/

http://www.fiannafail.ie/news/entry/labour-whip-either-wedded-to-politics-of-past-or-ignorant-to-workings-of-oi/

This ban is ridiculous and is a combination of an oversensitive and over interfering moderators who couldn't wait to but in on a thread that was going along fine and a desire to shut people up.

Palmach

Dades wrote: »

This isn't the first time I've had this conversation and not the first time I'm disinclined to change my opinion.
.

So in a very pompous self important way you have decided this ridiculous ban stays. I can see this "dispute resolution" is a cod. Should have known better than to expect fair play.

Dades

Palmach wrote: »

So in a very pompous self important way you have decided this ridiculous ban stays.

I'm sorry that's your perception. I'm just outlining in as clear a way as possible how, like nesf, I would treat accusations of ignorance. Clearly this process was never going to appease you unless your complaint was upheld.

If you want an Admin to further look at the complaint, just say.

Palmach

Dades wrote: »

I'm sorry that's your perception. I'm just outlining in as clear a way as possible how, like nesf, I would treat accusations of ignorance. Clearly this process was never going to appease you unless your complaint was upheld.

If you want an Admin to further look at the complaint, just say.

Judging by what has gone on it would clearly be a waste of time. Had a quick flick through the posts on this forum and the chances of getting fair play are clearly remote. I do note though that one of the two admin on this forum uses the word Ignorant on their profile page. Doesn't bother him/her.

Palmach

I would very much like admin to look at this ban if they could. Thanks.

Palmach

Ban has been lifted but would still like admin to look at the ban the ban was implemented. Thanks.