Politics Infraction

Tragedy

I received the following infraction for this post.

Please be more diplomatic and civil when enaging with other posters. There were other, better, avenues to pursue than calling Cal_Egle an all out liar. I understand you reported posts, and he has now been dealt with. Reporting stuff works. Other than that, you could have phrased it less personally; example, "You are repeatedly ignoring evidence put before you". This would have been much better.

You've been warned about this kind of thing before, hence the red card rather than the yellow. Keep it civil in future.

I pointed out to the mod in question that I hadn't called Cal_Egle an all out liar(small but fairly significant difference)
I also asked how calling him a liar was against the forum charter, as I felt it was a fact he had lied.

The mods response was to again insist I had called him an all out liar, and defended the infraction as calling him a liar was a personalised remark.

I responded again stating I hadn't called him an all out liar and explaining the difference between proven and all out(ya, really, I had to) and referring to the politics charter which states

If you are going to level allegations of lying at another poster, please be willing to prove that they are lying - that they deliberately intend to deceive. Simply calling someone a liar is not acceptable.

and finished with

Tragedy wrote:

Nowhere did I personally insult Cal, I didn't call him(or his views) stupid or ignorant etc, I didn't call his motives or political bias in to question.
I posted statistics released under the Freedom of Information act that showed Sinn Féin TDs have significantly higher than average expenses claims.
I had another user personalise the discussion against me, and I responded with the facts to back up my assertions. The user then lied, and further along, lied again - so I stated that he is a proven liar who accused me of being a shill because I posted something that didn't cast Sinn Féin as defenders of the people.

I didn't drag it to another thread, I didn't wait days and bring it up again out of nowhere, I didn't personally insult him, I did/am willing to show how he lied - all in line with the forum charter.
What exactly is in question here?

Unfortunately, Eliot decided to ignore the PM and hope it would go away until I sent him a reminder this morning.

His response was to take the the part of the charter I had to inform him of in the first place, remove most of it and respond with only this part "Simply calling someone a liar is not acceptable." and tell me as such it was quite clear cut.

So, the Mod twice told me "all out" means "proven", had to be educated on his own forums charter, ignored my PM and when prodded for a response then edited down the applicable part of the forum charter to pick out the sole lonely little part that supported his infraction.

Sceptre gave me a yellow card for personalising discussions two weeks ago, he was happy to explain why and I apologised for doing so and have attempted to keep from personalising replies in politics since.
Hence being peeved at both the Infraction, and Eliot's disdainful attitude afterwards.

Scofflaw

OK - what you're saying is that you have proven Cal Egle to be a liar, and therefore have the right to call him a "proven liar"?

moderately,
Scofflaw

Tragedy

Scofflaw wrote: »

OK - what you're saying is that you have proven Cal Egle to be a liar, and therefore have the right to call him a "proven liar"?

moderately,
Scofflaw

In the same discussion it happened in, according to the charter, yes.

As already posted

Forum Charter wrote:

If you are going to level allegations of lying at another poster, please be willing to prove that they are lying - that they deliberately intend to deceive. Simply calling someone a liar is not acceptable

and

Nowhere did I personally insult Cal, I didn't call him(or his views) stupid or ignorant etc, I didn't call his motives or political bias in to question.
I posted statistics released under the Freedom of Information act that showed Sinn Féin TDs have significantly higher than average expenses claims.
I had another user personalise the discussion against me, and I responded with the facts to back up my assertions. The user then lied, and further along, lied again - so I stated that he is a proven liar who accused me of being a shill because I posted something that didn't cast Sinn Féin as defenders of the people.

I didn't drag it to another thread, I didn't wait days and bring it up again out of nowhere, I didn't personally insult him, I did/am willing to show how he lied - all in line with the forum charter.

Scofflaw

I can accept that, since, as you say, it's the same thread, the same issue, and no long time lapse.

It probably would have been preferable, when bringing it up again, to be more specific about the issues you had previously shown him to be lying about. If nothing else, it prevents a mod from quite reasonably assuming you're simply being personal.

There isn't a 'wrong side' in this one - modding Politics at the moment is currently something of a whirlwind, and where, as in this case, the immediately visible post relies on certain prior discussions best known to the poster, only the CMods have the time to check fully. Luckily, that's what we're here for.

I'll request reversal of the infraction.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Tragedy

Thanks. I got a few warnings after I started posting in Politics, and for the most part I've tried engage with the mod, apologise and change my posting style and learn from them.
Even though I disagree with the infraction, I agree with his point and won't be using liar/lying in the future.

Scofflaw

Tragedy wrote: »

Thanks. I got a few warnings after I started posting in Politics, and for the most part I've tried engage with the mod, apologise and change my posting style and learn from them.
Even though I disagree with the infraction, I agree with his point and won't be using liar/lying in the future.

I generally prefer "you've been shown to be wrong about X" or "haven't changed your position despite being shown to be wrong about X", myself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tragedy

Just want to say thanks to both Scofflaw and Eliot for their handling of this, much appreciated!

bonkey

Another happy customer

I'm marking this as resolved and closing. If that's wrong, for any reason, PM me.