Infraction in AH

Boombastic

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=82466085#post82466085


My post has been removed but I crossed out Biggins name after another poster referred to them and replaced it with "someone I encountered somewhere, but can't say who" - you can see the original post, I can't but it was something to that effect


How is this being uncivil, when this type of insulting name calling goes unsanctioned? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81142212&postcount=43

Penn

Hi Boombastic,

Your post was clearly a dig at another user. I genuinely can't see how you think it wasn't.

I'm recommending that the infraction stands. You may ask for an admin to review this decision if you wish.

Boombastic

How is what I said offensive in any way shape or form?

Penn

Boombastic wrote: »

How is what I said offensive in any way shape or form?

Just because you didn't use any offensive terms or words doesn't mean you weren't taking a dig at them. It's clear what your intention was with your comments.

Boombastic

Penn wrote: »

Just because you didn't use any offensive terms or words doesn't mean you weren't taking a dig at them. It's clear what your intention was with your comments.

In a thread titled "Possible Topics we may not talk about"
Other poster mentioned someone specific
I changed it to something more ambiguous, non-specific and get infracted:rolleyes:

But you seen to be pretty clear what my intentions where, even though you can't actually explain how it was offensive or how it is a dig at another user

Penn

Okay, for the sake of clarity, here was your post:

Boombastic wrote:

*Redacted* wrote:

Re: Things we can't discuss, ask Biggins someone you encountered, somewhere but you can't say who:)

fyp:D

Now, your claim of someone saying something specific and you changing it to "something more ambiguous, non-specific" because it was a thread about topics you can't talk about generally falls apart when out of all the things which had been mentioned (the thread was on the fifth page by that point), you only did that for a post which mentioned Biggins. Then the fact that you left Biggins' name in the post rather than editing it out so people still knew who you were referring to. Then the fact that some people have made fun of Biggins before for not being specific enough or withholding some information (which is what the poster above you whose name I've edited out was referring to and who was also infracted for his post). And lastly the fact that you added a laughing smiley face to the end of your post.

That is how it was a clear dig at another user.

I am upholding the infraction. You may ask for an admin to review this decision if you wish.

g'em

Boombastic wrote: »

How is what I said offensive in any way shape or form?

It was a dig at another poster, and the edit only served to make it worse. The only thing more offensive here are your proclamations of innocence. Infraction upheld.