A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (Locked down several times a year during the major championships)
I’m baaack. Perhaps not for long if GH decides to ban me for this posting. So, did my punishment fit the crime?
e: wAOY - Felix, SRR, Adams, Perkovic
Tuariki wrote:.... By j-a-m's moronic logic.... Also by j-a-m's stupid logic...
Do come back and play with us in a while when you learn to be a tad more civil with your fellow posters.
A week ago I was summarily banned by GH because he considered I was uncivil to a fellow poster. If saying that someone’s logic is moronic and stupid is deemed uncivil then I am guilty as charged. And so, I unreservedly apologise to j-a-m for my un-civility. I still think j-a-m's logic is faulty. (I hope “faulty” is not considered to be uncivil)
But, I am also puzzled as to: (1) Why my comments were considered to be uncivil; and (2) Why my comments were deserving of a ban
The source of my puzzlement is from what appears to be common usage on this message board. To demonstrate, I reproduce a selection of postings from GH and a posting from Conor Dary.
Re: Who the hell writes the Bleacher Report articles on Trac by gh » Tue May 22, 2012 7:56 pm the best thing you can probably do in these cases is to deluge the moron with negative comments and hope that management will take note.
And so my puzzlement; why was it OK for GH just 6 months ago to call him a moron? Or is it one rule for the ref and another rule for the players.
Re: T&F N Oly predictions, and reaction by gh » Wed Jul 11, 2012 9:23 am Yes, stirring the shit is part of what predictions are all about. And we're not remotely offended by any controversy that is raised.
having said that, the Jamaican columnist does make one moronic comment: <<While we understand that T&F News' mission remains to push America's interests....>>
And, if GH was not remotely offended 4 months ago, and felt justified in describing someone as” moronic”, then why is it when I describe someone’s opinion to be “moronic” it is now considered uncivil and presumably offensive and deserving of an instant ban.
Re: ¶2012 OG: wSP–Nadzeya Ostapchuk (Belarus) 70-1 (21.36) by gh » Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:31 pm Unless you're willing to have your picture posted in public and the etherdom at general free to comment, shut the fuck up about how athletes look—particularly women—and go away. Is that clear enough?
Clearly a civil, non-offensive expression.
Re: 2012OT m5000—i smell a barnburner by Conor Dary » Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:27 pm Look, you are an ignorant, racist moron. Why not leave it at that.
And what you call opinion, is a disgusting refusal to look at the facts. Take your Birther nonsense somewhere else.
And here we have Conor providing us with a rather descriptive expression of presumed civility.
And so members of the jury, the case for the defence rests.
Wow - are you overthinking this! I have been banned MANY times for transgressions of a capricious nature. It is what it is. The moderator has carte blanche to punish or reward as s/he sees fit. It's the law!
Context matters, and with gh's comments about looks that is especially the case. Also, finding some posts with offensive words is not very much of a defense, since there are probably close to a million posts and not all of them get monitored. In addition, the tone and the degree to which it applies to the person and not simply a statement would matter to me. Personal attacks are frowned upon, especially as regards aspects not relevant to discussion.
jeremyp wrote:Is it time to gather on T&F's Tahrir square and denounce capricious dictatorship?
jeremyp are you going to apply to gh for the permit to assemble on his square?
Context, prior history, prior interactions with target poster, and nipping in the bud all seem to play into why it often seems like the rules wander a bit. Good-- it shows that it's not words getting highlighted but ideas. Call some TV Talking Head a MORON differs from calling a fellow poster a moron IMO.
There is a tone to these message boards and respecting our fellow posters in part of that tone.
I thnk I may have been briefly banned (form posting, not reading?) once, but don't remember and it did not matter. It is no big deal- think of it as being warned by an officer for not stopping completely at a stop sign on your bicycle.
I have not yet been banned for my indiscretions, but I did get a sense of how a big ban might work when they had the system problem that started banning people (including gh). I remember being shocked and disappointed and wondering where I would share track and field stuff. It was a big relief to have it not be a ban....
marknhj wrote:I'm glad you're back. Gives us the opportunity to bring up 38-21
OMG!! This is really low. And really uncivil. Much better to be called moronic and stupid than bring up 38-21. But then there are times when I am quite happy to be a hypocrite and acknowledge that my Mum was born, bred and raised in Blackheath. For those of you who do not know where Blackheath is,it is in the East End of London.
38-21 Hamilton Tiger Cats beat Buffalo Bills, 8 August 1961 - that must be it.
I am sure that 38-21 wasn't just a mean, low down reference to an event that took place at Twickenham last weekend - but it is rapidly fading from the Antipodean memory banks. And yes, OK, the All Blacks were hopeless.
26mi235 wrote:I have not yet been banned for my indiscretions, but I did get a sense of how a big ban might work when they had the system problem that started banning people (including gh). I remember being shocked and disappointed and wondering where I would share track and field stuff. It was a big relief to have it not be a ban....
You need to learn to occasionally be offensive and uncivil because it is cathartic. Don't worry, if you get banned there are many ways to find relief - in the private obscurity of your banning.
Flumpy wrote:I got banned 3 times during the Olympics. Mostly for calling drug cheats, 'drug cheats'.
Is that some kind or record?
You should run for Parliament flumpy. You could get yourself banned regularly for things such as accusing David Cameron of being a estrogen enhanced whimp.
When I was an MP in NZ, Mr Speaker was always banning Members from the House. I only got kicked out once. I think I suggested that one of my honourable colleagues must have been a Heinrich Himmler's daughter. It was something to do with her having the "solution" to a problem. I thought she said the final solution. I think Mr Speaker thought I was being offensive
Helen S wrote:I thnk I may have been briefly banned (form posting, not reading?) once, but don't remember and it did not matter. It is no big deal- think of it as being warned by an officer for not stopping completely at a stop sign on your bicycle.
jeremyp wrote:Is it time to gather on T&F's Tahrir square and denounce capricious dictatorship?
Does the expression "pissing into the wind" ring a bell?
I always check the wind direction. But I guess one should also look down the hill to see who you are pissing on. I just didn't think GH was hiding downwind.
Marlow wrote:Wow - are you overthinking this! I have been banned MANY times for transgressions of a capricious nature. It is what it is. The moderator has carte blanche to punish or reward as s/he sees fit. It's the law!
Am not over thinking. Just nothing better to do until Jacko hurries up and breaks some other record.
Flumpy wrote:I got banned 3 times during the Olympics. Mostly for calling drug cheats, 'drug cheats'.
Is that some kind or record?
You should run for Parliament flumpy. You could get yourself banned regularly for things such as accusing David Cameron of being a estrogen enhanced whimp.
When I was an MP in NZ, Mr Speaker was always banning Members from the House. I only got kicked out once. I think I suggested that one of my honourable colleagues must have been a Heinrich Himmler's daughter. It was something to do with her having the "solution" to a problem. I thought she said the final solution. I think Mr Speaker thought I was being offensive
Women do find it unpalatable to be considered decades older than they really are .
marknhj wrote:I'm glad you're back. Gives us the opportunity to bring up 38-21
OMG!! This is really low. And really uncivil. Much better to be called moronic and stupid than bring up 38-21. But then there are times when I am quite happy to be a hypocrite and acknowledge that my Mum was born, bred and raised in Blackheath. For those of you who do not know where Blackheath is,it is in the East End of London.
38-21 Hamilton Tiger Cats beat Buffalo Bills, 8 August 1961 - that must be it.
I am sure that 38-21 wasn't just a mean, low down reference to an event that took place at Twickenham last weekend - but it is rapidly fading from the Antipodean memory banks. And yes, OK, the All Blacks were hopeless.
I logged onto an illegal feed on my laptop just in time to see the final whistle blown. I almost fell out of bed with shock at that score plus seeing that West Ham had beaten Chelsea 3-1. I assumed I was in the midst of a cruel dream...
I spent half my childhood in Blackheath; my Dad was born there and my uncle used to run middle distance for Blackheath Harriers (Sydney Wooderson's club). Or rather, Blackeef 'Arry-errrs.
Yes Tuariki, it was right of GH to ban you for using "moronic and "stupid" about fellow posters. You are also a free thinker and a good laugh, so you have to be put in your place.
(OK then. Was it right for the BMAF Chairman unilaterally to ban me for one whole year in 2007, citing 'bringing the sport into disrepute,' for not apologizing to BMAF?)
Since this thread is primarily about calling people names, let me make a public declaration that some here will endorse, some others would not give a rat's ass about.
Pego - "Assholes" does not count. I complained that the BMAF Team Manager at 2006 WMA Indoors Linz tried to smuggle a GBR relay runner past the Call Room and that he called me an "Asshole" for opposing him. Did not matter. Say something worse.
Lonewolf - BMAF stands for British Masters Athletics Federation.
Anthony Treacher wrote:Pego - "Assholes" does not count. I complained that the BMAF Team Manager at 2006 WMA Indoors Linz tried to smuggle a GBR relay runner past the Call Room and that he called me an "Asshole" for opposing him. Did not matter. Say something worse.
Lonewolf - BMAF stands for British Masters Athletics Federation.
Pego wrote:Since this thread is primarily about calling people names, let me make a public declaration that some here will endorse, some others would not give a rat's ass about.
NHL and NHLPA are a bunch of assholes.
..not to mention a bunch of cork soaking bastiges.
marknhj wrote:I'm glad you're back. Gives us the opportunity to bring up 38-21
I find this posting extremely offensive and hope you are banned forever!
I think this the wrong approach. It is better to come up with numbers that even more offensive and uncivil. For example: 27 - 7 861 - 432 5 - 1 75.34 - 53.15
I will explain in another posting the origins of their offensiveness.
Marknhj, daisy, treacher are of course invited to identify the offensiveness. As are any other of the civil poms on this message board
It's Garry's board and even if I may not agree with him on every single decision, I am happy that he tires to keep a level of civility on it. And I guess his moderating may be a bit lax next weekend when The Hobbit movie debuts.
are you going to apply to gh for the permit to assemble on his square?
