Thread Closed
(05-18-2015, 11:49 PM)Oswin Wrote: I don't see what the problem with that is, unless it comes down to not wanting to self censor.
Evidently, there are also individuals who feel it is impossible to simply show basic respect to other posters as human beings when any level of disagreement is reached, which I find to be a very odd position to take.
Yes, some people might take offense easily and may consider even simple disagreements to be such, but those disagreements are not actionable. Only if it is clear from the perspective of multiple people can you be actioned for making a post that is clearly and obviously inflammatory (and remember, warnings and even bans can be appealed). There is a visible distinction between a simple disagreement and a post that is designed in such a way as to belittle the viewpoint or the viewpoint's holder, often in a crass fashion. Unless one of the mods goes off the rails, there will never be a point where you get warned just for disagreeing with someone. Never.
We have a problem on the RPC, and it does no one any favors to somehow pretend that being hands-off is the direction to take when that so clearly has not worked for it thus far. If you have a specific example of a moderator action that is questionable, clearly, as this thread has shown, you can take it up with the mods and have them reconsider the action and possibly the rule being enforced. Until that happens, speaking in such vagaries as "what if someone gets offended?!" doesn't help anything and only serves to paint your intentions in a suspicious light.