Appealing infraction for being "crude"

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm going to have to go with 'crude' as an entirely reasonable judgement.

And the reason for that is? I have made it quite clear why it is that I feel the infraction was unreasonable and I would appreciate it if you in return would give some sort of explanation as to why you feel it wasn't.

And other poster's infractions or lack thereof never settles the question of whether a given post deserves an infraction or warning.

Did you miss:

BrokenHero wrote: »

That's just one example, there are many (in that thread alone) and so on that basis I am appealing the infraction for crudity and "posting below the standard of TGC" as it appears to be inconsistent with what is generally deemed more than acceptable standard of discourse on the forum.

Quite clearly, I am not saying that because one or two users have posted X, on that basis I should be allowed to post Y. What I am saying is that it is deemed perfectly acceptable to post X on that forum regularly and consistently and so deciding to infract someone for saying Y is absurd.

I'm afraid I have no difficulty at all in upholding a yellow card for this.

Again, you don't say why. All you are doing here is saying that that have "no difficulty" upholding the yellow card. Obviously, but why? No reasoning for it. Surely you must have some.

You can appeal that decision to the Admins.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Fine, but I would much prefer to first hear just why it is that you're choosing to endorse the infraction. You are a SOC Cmod and so as such, you are clearly more than familiar with the content of tGC. The member of admin that I get may not be be.

Here's my point in a nutshell, Scofflaw. If you at least address it, then I may not ask for an admin review at all as I will feel that my reasoning was given the respect which I feel it deserves:

There are many many threads in tGC, as you know, that require somewhat of an adult nature of conversation to take place. It may not be Sex & Sexuality, but adult topic threads are quite commonplace and again, I of course respect that tGC mods do not want overly graphic posts being posted there but I just not feel that my post qualified as such.

The thread regarding sex during menstruation which I referenced already was just one of them. I could just as easily have referenced the Penis Enlargement thread, the Sexual Partners thread, the Peeing in front of Other Men thread etc etc, all of which contain quite graphic discussion and where users spoke quite candidly about sexual matters such as dealing with blood flow during intercourse (in the case of the menstruation thread) and where words were used for the male and female genitalia, which would be deemed far more vulgar and crude than the words which I used, which lets face it, most children would learn in primary school.

I mean, is it really been suggested here that a discussion where human genitalia is spoke of in quite a vulgar and graphic fashion, which includes discourse regarding the presence of blood during sex, is somehow less crude than someone mentioning human genitalia using non-vulgar terms and which speaks of the presence of cream?

Seems a nonsensical infraction to be quite honest and I would suggest perhaps that tGC amend their charter if users are going to be so indiscriminately accused of posting below the forum's standard, as (other than NSFW images and the like) I see no mention of crudity within it, let alone what the forum's moderators feels qualifies as such, on a given day.

trout wrote: »

I've read the original post, in the context of the thread.

The tone of the post strikes me as somewhat crude. Specifically the part about buying a ticket. I think that's crude.

"Somewhat crude"? It was a joke and again, hardly something which would be out of place in tGC. I was just trying to lighten the post in an effort to make it clear that I do not necessarily have an issue with women taking part in those acts at those shows, just that were it common for men to take part in similar acts when at female lap dancing clubs, they would without doubt be viewed in far different light than women who do. Which is why I felt it relevant to that thread. I don't see how else I was supposed to make the point that I wished to, without describing the act in some fashion. You suggest omitting the joke would have done that, which I feel is unfair as it implies joking about such things have no place in tGC and again this too seems to be not be the case at all, from my reading of the forum at least.

This infraction is specifically for that post, in that thread ... not what might be observed from other posts/threads.

I am being accused of posting below the standard of tGC and so surely the forum's other threads and posts have been brought into by the moderator making the accusation to begin with. Surely the forums other threads fall under the umbrella which is "tGC standard". Yet, when I reference other threads, it's being implied they are not relevant.

Also, I think it's worth highlighting, that the thread we are talking about here was one started to discuss women discreetly checking out the size of men's bulges and so it's not as if I jumped on a thread which had a more angelic topic and started to inappropriately shoehorn it into it. I could understand the infraction somewhat perhaps if I had.

If you think the line is blurry ... you are right, it is.

It's not that I just think the line is blurry. I appreciate that it would be almost impossible for moderators to say precisely what is and is not acceptable to post, with regards to crudity but surely what I posted was quite tame given what is regularly deemed acceptable in tGC. You, and the forum's moderators don't seem to feel that any of this is relevant and so not much I can do than to say that I think it's nonsensical to suggest that it isn't, given that I am being accused of posting below tGC standard.

If you think other posts have crossed the line, feel free to report them.

Trout, I have no problem with any of the posts which I have referenced. I thought it obvious, but let me make it perfectly clear that I merely exampled those posts and threads in an effort to show that regularly and consistently posts are made in tGC which are far more crude in nature and tone than the one which I made.. and for no other reason.

The mod made a judgement call ... edited the post and infracted. I think that's reasonable.

I'm picking this up as a former tGC mod & cmod.

Fair enough. Thanks, I apppreciate you looking at it.