Infraction dispute

Mr Whom

Hi I got an infraction for calling Ray Darcy "pathetic". I've have a few messages with the mod and we disagree on if this constitutes abuse. Could someone help here ? The mod suggested I should post here I think.

Sad Professor

Hi there, I’ll look into this for you. Either forward me the relevant PMs you exchanged with the mod or explain your issue with the action and I’ll investigate, thanks.

Mr Whom

Sad Professor wrote: »

Hi there, I’ll look into this for you. Either forward me the relevant PMs you exchanged with the mod or explain your issue with the action and I’ll investigate, thanks.

Can I forward PMs from a mobile ? Don't seem to be able to.

Basically I was infracted and had a post deleted for calling Ray Darcy a "pathetic individual"

Sad Professor

Okay, bear with me and I’ll have a look.

Sad Professor

Alright so here was your post from the Ray D’arcy thread:

Mr Whom wrote:

Arne_Saknussem wrote:

Poor fella is scared stiff of Jenny i'd imagine.

He reminds me of a scared simpering little mouse pandering to all the leftie liberal social justice warrior agenda. Pathetic individual.

The word “pathetic” is not in itself an abusive term. For example, if you had referred to the presenter’s presenting style as being “pathetic” that would not necessarily be considered an insult under the rules of the Radio charter. However, your post in this instance was clearly directed at the presenter personally, who you described as a “scared simpering little mouse” and “pathetic individual”. I can’t read this as anything other than an insulting and offensive attack on the presenter.

I understand the anger, frustration and even rage that some radio presenters can evoke in listeners, but the Radio forum has strict rules about presenter abuse and I’m afraid I have to agree with the mod that your post was in breach of it.

I am upholding the infraction.

Mr Whom

Sad Professor wrote: »

Alright so here was your post from the Ray D’arcy thread:



The word “pathetic” is not in itself an abusive term. For example, if you had referred to the presenter’s presenting style as being “pathetic” that would not necessarily be considered an insult under the rules of the Radio charter. However, your post in this instance was clearly directed at the presenter personally, who you described as a “scared simpering little mouse” and “pathetic individual”. I can’t read this as anything other than an insulting and offensive attack on the presenter.

I understand the anger, frustration and even rage that some radio presenters can evoke in listeners, but the Radio forum has strict rules about presenter abuse and I’m afraid I have to agree with the mod that your post was in breach of it.

I am upholding the infraction.

I really don't think this is correct

Sad Professor

Mr Whom wrote: »

I really don't think this is correct

If you wish I can ask an admin to review my decision?

Mr Whom

Sad Professor wrote: »

If you wish I can ask an admin to review my decision?

Ok

The Hill Billy

The Radio forum charter is quite clear that personal abuse towards presenters is not tolerated. Referring to someone a 'pathetic individual' falls under this.

So, what exactly do you think is not correct in Sad Professor's response?

Mr Whom

The Hill Billy wrote: »

The Radio forum charter is quite clear that personal abuse towards presenters is not tolerated. Referring to someone a 'pathetic individual' falls under this.

So, what exactly do you think is not correct in Sad Professor's response?

For me pathetic = sad and is not an insult

Mr Whom2

Hello. I got banned for no reason ? I had to start a new account. What's going on?

Zaph

No, you were banned for a very good reason, and so has your new account.