Legacy Posters stirring trouble

[mox 298]

I am pastafarian, mock at your leisure.

You just gained +100 rep in my book.

[HappyKnappy 30]

Subscribed. Belief in an invisible sky man is, imho, delusional no matter what you want to call yourself. Therefore, I propose a new rule: if you are going to attack someone's religion, you must disclose your own so I can expose it for the woo that it is.

It may be a fair approach, but why would my beliefs be mocked for someone else's narrow minded views??? Not saying that I am ofended, but it may not be the same for other VJers, y'know? Religion is a big tangled mess that you don't want to get caught up in...

[Pooky 3,781]

AJ, you are discounting one of the tenants of VJ OT. You can get away with just about any sort of racism, as long as it is directed towards brown people. Someone makes a racist post in OT, post deleted. But when I call them ignorant, I get a 48 hour suspension. See the pattern there.

The mangling of the English (American) language going on lately defies belief.

There are no "tenants" of VJ OT!!! Only visitors.

But "tenets"? Aye, there are a few of those. Being Snarky on a Sunday being up there among them.

[^_^ 5,021]

Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination).

It would seem to me that members of a religion - let's take Mormons as an example to avoid being inflammatory - are a "group of people" and are "identified by a unifying characteristic" (their faith in the tenets of Mormonism).

The question really becomes, is a post intended to degrade them? Is there intent? How do you determine intent? I'd argue by past post history. If a poster has shown a history of being anti-Mormon, then you have intent. But is the content degrading? To degrade is to "bring to low esteem or into disrepute".

I don't know about you, but I don't see this standard being applied much at all.

Edited August 23, 2010 by Legacy member

[Kathryn41 3,205]

If Islam is going to be attacked and mocked and Muslims made to feel unwelcome, then the same treatment is fair for adherents of other faiths.

Unless moderation says it's a problem, in which case it will do so for all faiths.

It is a violation of TOS to:

*Defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others.

*Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination). For instance, racist or sexist content may be considered hate speech.

*Publish, Post, upload, distribute or disseminate or offer to do the same any inappropriate, defamatory, infringing, obscene, or unlawful material, information, or in general, content

*Make comments in a Post either direct or implied toward another member that are purposely designed to upset, antagonize, make fun of, belittle, or otherwise instigate an argument that takes away from the personal enjoyment of the Service by other users

No one is exempt from these TOS and they apply equally to all.

[The_Dude 1,142]

The mangling of the English (American) language going on lately defies belief.

There are no "tenants" of VJ OT!!! Only visitors.

But "tenets"? Aye, there are a few of those. Being Snarky on a Sunday being up there among them.

OK, you caught me. But in my defense, I blame Stella Artois

[Kathryn41 3,205]

It would seem to me that members of a religion - let's take Mormons as an example to avoid being inflammatory - are a "group of people" and are "identified by a unifying characteristic" (their faith in the tenets of Mormonism).

The question really becomes, is a post intended to degrade them? Is there intent? How do you determine intent? I'd argue by past post history. If a poster has shown a history of being anti-Mormon, then you have intent. But is the content degrading? To degrade is to "bring to low esteem or into disrepute".

I don't know about you, but I don't see this standard being applied much at all.

We certainly attempt to apply it equally to all. If a comment isn't reported, then we probably don't attend to it, though, that is true. I wish there was a clear cut measuring stick that we could hold up to every post and every poster and say 'yep, over this line - fail' 'under this line - pass'. Oh, how I wish we had such a measuring stick!

Edited August 23, 2010 by Kathryn41

[Peikko 1,575]

It would seem to me that members of a religion - let's take Mormons as an example to avoid being inflammatory - are a "group of people" and are "identified by a unifying characteristic" (their faith in the tenets of Mormonism).

The question really becomes, is a post intended to degrade them? Is there intent? How do you determine intent? I'd argue by past post history. If a poster has shown a history of being anti-Mormon, then you have intent. But is the content degrading? To degrade is to "bring to low esteem or into disrepute".

I don't know about you, but I don't see this standard being applied much at all.

Bingo - I reported an example of this, the fist and last time I'll bother probably because no one appears to be able to discern a quite obvious pattern of behaviour judging by the action that was taken on the issue - nothing - unless the mods are still cogitating on the issue because it is so complex.

[Pooky 3,781]

OK, you caught me. But in my defense, I blame Stella Artois

Yeah, yeah, blame the French.

I would

Edited August 23, 2010 by Pooky

[mox 298]

let's take Mormons as an example to avoid being inflammatory

Actually there's an active poster in one of the regional forums who's a very devout Mormon. Believes the whole gold plates out of a hat and that native Americans are a lost Jewish tribe and everything. Just goes to show, you never know who you're going to offend.

[^_^ 5,021]

We certainly attempt to apply it equally to all. If a comment isn't reported, then we probably don't attend to it, though, that is true. I wish there was a clear cut measuring stick that we could hold up to every post and every poster and say 'yep, over this line - fail' 'under this line - pass'. Oh, how I wish we had such a measuring stick!

Going forward, if a thread is intended to bring a certain religion into disrepute (i.e. degrade), I'll be sure to report it. After all, that is TOS.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Yeah, yeah, blame the French.

I would

OK, now that is your fail. Stella is Belgian.

[Peikko 1,575]

Going forward, if a thread is intended to bring a certain religion into disrepute (i.e. degrade), I'll be sure to report it. After all, that is TOS.

If you are referring to JAS and his blatant threads being used to discredit muslims, I already reported it. Nothing happened. Clearly this is not a TOS violation - I'm actually very disappointed.

[Pooky 3,781]

OK, now that is your fail. Stella is Belgian.

But all the Ads are in French, and the Walloon think the French half of Belgium really doesn't count as Belgian.

[^_^ 5,021]

If you are referring to JAS and his blatant threads being used to discredit muslims, I already reported it. Nothing happened. Clearly this is not a TOS violation - I'm actually very disappointed.

Perhaps the decision was made that those threads did not bring any groups of people with a unifying characteristic into disrepute.