How to respond to an insult on a forum ?

[duszek]

Phil is usually very polite, but he has an issue with Hex and probably cannot stop it or solve it.

He might think: if a little dog pees on my leg I should give him a kick to make him stop.

Hobbes likes a good bark every once in a while, but he is not all bad. And his spelling is amazingly good.

[duszek]

How about creating a kind of blaming site or blaming thread or blaming section where people can complain about other forum members who have wronged them and explain why ?

If the complaints are not justified other forum members can contact the whiners and give them advice.

If the complaints are justified the wronged complainers can at least ruin the reputation of the bad guys.

[surreptitious57]

There is next to no moderation on the forum which is quite unusual in my experience
And so if there was more then maybe that might lead to a better quality of discourse
Though I do like the current situation for that allows members to be more expressive
I have no problem with any one here and so let it be I say for that is just how I like it

[duszek]

Jews have there wall of complaints in Jerusalem, and for a good reason.

If someone feels wronged and insulted he should not just swallow it, he should express it.
The formulating of the complaint can already alleviate the pain and create some health in the head and in the soul.

I suggest a section of complaints on an easy-going forum like this one.
A thread for every culprit.
If someone has a problem with someone he can read the thread about this person and see what he has already done to other people.
The culprit has a right to remonstrate, of course.

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

• Gustav Bjornstrand: "Eliminate the whole thread where the insult occurred."
  
  Surreptitious57: "There would be very few threads left on the forum if you did that
  How about for every insult you post you lose seven days privileges.
  
  "Were this in place now Hobbes and Leo and Phil and Hex and veg would all be out
  This would affect me as well for I would then have to wait for them to come back

I call to your attention that Lacewing had an entire 33+ page thread eliminated because she did not like the content. I am trying to understand how the justification of this was constructed. Perhaps Lacewing can offer her reasoning.

Do you feel better now, Lacewing? No regrets?

My own opinion is that you 'should' reverse your own decision and ask that the thread be reinstated. I don't think you or anyone should 'control' the content of threads nor be allowed to eliminate them spuriously.

What do you think?

It is an interesting exercise in practical ethics and it will be interesting to hear what you have to say.

From an earlier post:

If something rings true or has value, it does not feel like an insult to me, even if it's harsh. Therefore, how I categorize insults are those bombardments that are so obviously idiotic (and made-up or projected) that I either call them out as such, or I'm guessing that other observers will recognize it for what it is, even if I decide not to respond at all. It does not matter to me one way or the other, to convince anybody of anything. On some level... I think we all know the truth about ourselves. I know what does and does not apply to me... and someone else (who is being insulting) knows if they are being an ass, even if they deny it and pretend otherwise. I think most people are pretty perceptive at deciphering subtle cues... so it's funny to watch us all go through the motions aloud.

Why then the elimination of the entire thread? Does the question seem just?

[duszek]

Could you give us your version of the story, Gustav ?

For those who don´t know the thread and the emotions that accompanied it.

What unpleasant truth did Lacewing try to erase ?

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

Why is my version relevant? Can you imagine any circumstance where you should have the right to eliminate a thread for other than, say, an illegality?

Many things get said in good, contentious and polemical conversations. Who can decide on a whim to eliminate a thread?

[Lacewing]

Gustav, I do not control anything on this forum. You had been asked repeatedly by multiple people to move your off-topic discussion to another thread. You did not, and argued as usual that your reasoning is more valid than other people's. All you had to do was start your own topic, and resume your discussion there. Instead, your excessive bombardment and derailment continued on the thread I had created for a different purpose. You deemed your purpose more valid and chose to use it as your personal platform. So I asked the moderator to consider the matter and move your discussion, or, if that was not possible, I said I was fine if the entire thread was deleted. The moderator assessed it and chose to delete it.

Stop being a big baby. You've repeatedly expressed and demonstrated the ways you don't respect people here, and then you expect for them to endure your behavior unquestioningly. This was all in your hands. Take responsibility.

[duszek]

Gustav:

A whim ?

So Lacewing is a capricious mistress who persuaded a mod (Ariging or Rick) to eliminate a thread just because she wanted to see it disappear ?

Perhaps some very serious interests are at stake here.
Lacewing´s psychiatrist happens to be married to Rick and he or she asked Rick to delete the thread because Lacewing could not bear something about it and it was serious indeed.

Perhaps your version of the story is the best truth we can get.
Come forward and deliver your testimony.

[duszek]

Ahhhhhaaa !

Lacewing has explained nicely.

I see no whim.

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

Gustav, I do not control anything on this forum.

In other words you had the thread deleted because you did not like the content.

It is that simple.

I am not interested in debating it with you or getting into drama. I am interested in presenting the issue for general conversation. To see what others think. Personally, and under any circumstance, I think your decision was wrong.

What if one other participant in that thread (not myself I mean) did not want to see their writing eliminated? Would your decision still hold? What if Leo or Hobbes or Uwot would not have wanted their writing eliminated? What then?

[duszek]

"Not like the content" can mean a lot of things.

In this specific case it meant that Gustav derailed the thread of Lacewing.

So we can formulate more precisely:

Is it o.k. to make a mod delete a thread because someone else derails it ?
Is it fair towards the derailer to do it ?
Is it fair towards third parties who see their writings deleted as collateral damage ?

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

'Derailment' is obviously a subjective term, and I think we all know this. What is 'derailment' for one is 'contribution' for another. A thread may be pulled in different directions, is that 'derailment'? As I think we all recognise every thread has a life of its own. They tend to go where they will.

The question still stands: Is it ethically correct that the originator of a thread for any reason cause that thread to be eliminated? The secondary question is: If one or more of the persons who participated in that thread do not wish the thread, or their posts, to be eliminated, does the originator of the thread have the right to eliminate it?

I think the answer for a forum like this, and one with ethics and philosophy as prime considerations, is (or should be) no. And obviously I think it wrong that the thread was eliminated. I think the thread should be reinstated and I think that Lacewing should ask that this be done. (Of course this is my own opinion and no one is expected to share it. And I know too that there is virtually no chance that that will happen!)

The question resolves back to the one asked in this thread: How to respond to an insult on a forum? Anything can be interpreted as an 'insult'!

Much better to be stronger than any insult. If on the basis of a whim, or caprice, or pique, we cause the opinions and ideas of others to be eliminated we are engaging I think in reprehensible behaviour.

[surreptitious57]

I am not in favour of individual posts let alone entire threads being deleted because it takes things out of
context. A post is usually a response to another post and so if one is removed by mod it can mean reading
that particular part of the thread may be confusing. For it is no different to reading a book that has pages
missing from it. By all means punish a member if they are in breach of the rules but leave any posts intact

[duszek]

Gustav has raised valid points.

It has never bothered me if my threads got derailed. If I wanted to persue my original topic I started this topic anew and inserted the insights from the old thread in the opening post of the new thread.

Why was Lacewing so annoyed by the derailment of her thread ?

Gustav seems to be winning the argument now.

Lacewing, what can you offer to the jury now ?