Now We Know Where The Evil Ones Get Their Weapons

I just think that you and I view A2K from a fundamentally different angle, is all.

We all know that the rules are, shall we say, somewhat bendable; I feel that this is in large part because there is a recognition amongst various members of the community that politics leads to heated discussion on a regular basis. It isn't always easy to draw the lines in these discussions that we would wish, in order to confrom to the ToS. This isn't an excuse for violating them - as I said above, if I get banned, it is hardly anyone else's fault - but an understanding of the difference between the theoretical world of A2K and the real world of A2K.

For example, you are allowed to insult and denigrate someone all you like, all day long, as long as you couch it in flowery language. Some of the deepest and most personal insults I've witnesses on this board were written in such a way. These are not considered violations of the ToS, but it is foolish to assume that the recipients of these insults aren't affected the same way as those who receive the more 'childish' insults.

Let us use an example: say a member argues the position over and over again that Saddam was justified in everything he did and should not have been removed from his position by the US. This person doesn't care to hear logic and reacts negatively when challenged on his position. This person continually affects an air of superiority.

While one would not actively wish to bar those with different opinions from participating - even if you find their positions to be rather ignorant - there comes a point where you feel that the poster no longer adds value to the conversation. In fact, in many cases the poster turns the conversation to the topics they like to discuss as quickly as possible.

It would be nice to ignore them, and probably the more noble thing to do, but the attitude and professed opinions can be quite galling and it is difficult to keep threads from being derailed by this - all without said person violating the ToS. In effect, there are many ways to disrupt activity on A2K that have nothing to do with 'childish behavior' yet are just as destructive.

In these case derision and humor becomes an important tool for combating the problem. You aren't going to logic people into retracting their opinions very often - that's why it made such a splash when you admitted you were wrong about a stat a few pages back. This is something that others here are completely unable to do, and in fact will go to great lengths to avoid doing, never mind the effect on the conversation.

So rather than spend page after page of frustrating conversation, which won't lead anywhere, you instead decide to turn the conversation into one which adds value to your day: telling someone who you consider to be X just how X you consider them to be, and why that's bad, and why you find that funny. This effectively short-circuts the intended derailing of the conversation preferred by the person in question and replaces it with one preferred by yourself.

Is this the noble thing to do? Nope. But honestly, who gives a f*ck? My advice to you would be to lighten up some.

Cycloptichorn

Bill, I think your heart is in the right place concerning the necessity of civility if A2K is to survive in a form worth belonging to.

But at some point, you have to give the posters some lattitude in the way they make their point. I really don't see how Blacksmithn's terms violated the TOS, at least how it is applied on this forum.

As for comparisons to LSM, I can only ask how often Blacksmithn actually calls someone any kind of name, as opposed to LSM. Blacksmithn does not go on post after post, thread after thread, day after day doing what he did here. It was a one time thing, designed to make a point to a single poster who had invested a lot of time giving his points on that issue over and over. I am sorry that the intentional silliness of his "epithets" escaped you, but there really, really is a great difference between calling someone the complete version of "muh-fuh" and calling them Mr. Fancy Pants.

Whatever dude. Coward is fighting words, no matter how much lipstick you put on it... and it wasn't just aimed at a single poster, nor was there only one member participating in the bullying session. Good that everyone seems to have decided to leave well enough alone. Let's leave it at that.