Attack the post vs. Attack the poster

It's one of the only forums online that I've been a part of that has this rule. I reckon it's definitely good, but at the same time, sometimes a cùnt has to be called a cụnt, and that's where this place falls down a little bit.

Grayson

Are you giving us permission to call you a cnut?



Edited because I posted originally from my phone and formatting was weird.

duffman13

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's one of the only forums online that I've been a part of that has this rule. I reckon it's definitely good, but at the same time, sometimes a cùnt has to be called a cụnt, and that's where this place falls down a little bit.

Well by attacking the post your attacking the opinion therefore the poster without actually getting into petty name calling. The most common sense rule for any discussion site IMO

bucketybuck

I've seen this rule or variants of it on lots of message boards, bit strange to think thats its only a thing on Boards.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

Are you giving us permission to call you a cnut? ��

You already think I'm one, so go ahead.

duffman13 wrote: »

Well by attacking the post your attacking the opinion therefore the poster without actually getting into petty name calling. The most common sense rule for any discussion site IMO

It's also common sense to spot a poster who's an arse and call him one. The blanket rule is just to make moderation easier.

bucketybuck wrote: »

I've seen this rule or variants of it on lots of message boards, bit strange to think thats its only a thing on Boards.

I've only seen it enforced strongly here. It's respectable really.

begbysback

Terrible rule, posts don't post themselves

beertons

Verbal abuse to the postman? Never liked that cnut anyway.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Another hidden results poll!

If I could attack the poster I'd tell him what a gob he is for setting it up that way.

The Backwards Man

It's a low tactic, but it sure does feel good sometimes.

feargale

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's one of the only forums online that I've been a part of that has this rule. I reckon it's definitely good, but at the same time, sometimes a cùnt has to be called a cụnt, and that's where this place falls down a little bit.

If you acted the assole while cycling your bicycle would you be happy if a cop called you that or worse while taking you to task?

Beasty

The problem is it's always going to be judgemental. One poster may think another is being a cnut, but everyone else may have a differing view. Yes by posting that view you get your point across, but could turn other posters against you, or indeed the other poster. The discussion then turns to the personalities involved rather than the underlying topic

Outlaw Pete

I don't understand why anyone would want to call someone a c*** on a discussion forum. In my experience users usually only want to do it when they have little in the way of a sufficient rebuttal to that user's argument or they want to impress their emates.

Grandeeod

Hey OP can you add "both" to your poll? That will make me feel a lot better.

Noveight

I don't think it's too much of a hindrance, some posts are so ridiculous you've enough ammunition as it is

begbysback

Grandeeod wrote: »

Hey OP can you add "both" to your poll? That will make me feel a lot better.

I ticked the 2 boxes - just because I can

Grandeeod

begbysback wrote: »

I ticked the 2 boxes - just because I can

That's amazing! Even the poll has a hidden weapon.

andekwarhola

Would be tempting sometimes to see it but it would just get tedious, like the old Thunderdome ended up being.

I much prefer posters that have the imagination to successfully imply that you're a cnut while managing to breeze under the radar.

TomSweeney

The post for sure, keep debate alive as long as possible by at least keeping ad hominem attacks out ..

Gatling

Didn't you make a claim of defamation of character when it came to a post op

Graces7

duffman13 wrote: »

Well by attacking the post your attacking the opinion therefore the poster without actually getting into petty name calling. The most common sense rule for any discussion site IMO

and one that should not have to be laid down

alchemist33

On the Swedish version of boards, posters are constantly calling each other Knut and they seem to all get along okay.

Summer wind

If we were to attack the poster most threads would be chaos by the fifth post.

How Soon Is Now

Dont believe that bull**** your allowed call people what you like on here.

Ive seen it enough times in threads if someone isn't liked by enough people its all gravy to burn the ****er at the stake!

Yer Da sells Avon

"Your post has all the hallmarks of having been written by a cunt"

dudara

See “The Argument Pyramid”. High quality debate happens at the upper levels, but Boards also has a lot of debate taking place at the lower levels also

deco nate

alchemist33 wrote: »

On the Swedish version of boards, posters are constantly calling each other Knut and they seem to all get along okay.


knot?

Fek, now I get what people meant.

The results are hidden for everyone but Administrators, Moderators and thread starter.

I thought you were talking about it hidden before voting. Oops.


Posters: 35 votes
Posts: 46 votes

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Attacking the poster is only done out of ignorance, when said responder is not capable of attacking the post.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fek, now I get what people meant.

The results are hidden for everyone but Administrators, Moderators and thread starter.

I thought you were talking about it hidden before voting. Oops.


Posters: 35 votes
Posts: 46 votes

Can you 'make' it visible or request that it be so made?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Attacking the poster is only done out of ignorance, when said responder is not capable of attacking the post.

I have seen so much racism and sexism over the last few days in a couple of threads.

Attacking the post is pointless. Some people are truly assholes and being called that is the only level of conversation they deserve.


I'm not talking about attacking posters because their views are different. I'm talking about when their views are abhorrent.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Can you 'make' it visible or request that it be so made?

I tried editing the opening post but couldn't edit the poll. A mod would have to do it.

leggo

It depends. In a fair debate where both parties are above board and accountable for their words on an equal plane (or say a domestic argument), dealing solely with the point at hand in the hopes of finding a resolution that caters to all the concerns that led to the dispute to begin with should be the goal. That’s not how it always is though.

In a political debate or debate where there are dire stakes for the loser, your objective is to win over the audience and sadly people don’t always respond well to informed logic and facts (looks who’s the current US President for example). They can get distracted by stuff like charisma, brevity, snappy one-liners/slogans, looks even. So to forget all of that and not play ball in a debate with high stakes just makes you bad at achieving your objective.

Then there are situations where there’s a clear agenda at play and addressing the topic at hand would be giving it more respect and credibility than it deserves, when the more pertinent issue is handling the agenda itself. Attacking the point there is losing because the true point is an attempt to engage/troll you and give a non-issue more weight than it deserves. So you’re better cutting through the bull**** and putting a mirror back on the person making the point.

Ultimately all is fair in a battle of wits and reading the room is as big a part of using said wits as anything. But boards’ rule is a good rule of thumb to go by that covers them 99% of the time.

gozunda

Deleted User wrote: »

I tried editing the opening post but couldn't edit the poll. A mod would have to do it.

Yes indeed hence my suggestion. You can make a request to do that afaik ....

Necro

Just come play a game of Werewolf, OP. While personal abuse isn't tolerated, the accusations and counter-arguments are a lot of fun

Andrei Sisko

The Backwards Man wrote: »

It's a low tactic, but it sure does feel good sometimes.

Yes and bullies bully people because it "sure does feel good sometimes".

gozunda

Andrei Sisko wrote: »

Yes and bullies bully people because it "sure does feel good sometimes".

If you will excuse my latin - Verbis veritatis

Hector Bellend

why dont you all just go f@@ck yerselves

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

I have seen so much racism and sexism over the last few days in a couple of threads.

Attacking the post is pointless. Some people are truly assholes and being called that is the only level of conversation they deserve.


I'm not talking about attacking posters because their views are different. I'm talking about when their views are abhorrent.

... then call them out on being racist or sexist! That's not attacking the poster: that's stating either an opinion or fact depending on that's been said.

If people are assholes, it's usually easier to discect their post. Once that's done, I leave the conversation. If someone's an asshole, I simply don't debate with them beyond pointing out the flawed logic in their opinions.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

It's one of the only forums online that I've been a part of that has this rule. I reckon it's definitely good, but at the same time, sometimes a cùnt has to be called a cụnt, and that's where this place falls down a little bit.

I hate this idea, ergo you're a cunt.

Hang on have I sided with you or against you!!?

fancy pigeon

ELM327 wrote: »

I hate this idea, ergo you're a cunt.

Hang on have I sided with you or against you!!?

It depends on the c*nt... I see 3 main types:

Crafty c*nt
C*nt
Stupid c*nt

And it all depends on who one annoys to decide what type of c*nt one is

Skylinehead

Deleted User wrote: »

I tried editing the opening post but couldn't edit the poll. A mod would have to do it.

Should be able to see what the results are now.

mcmoustache

I think this was brought up by Pighead once upon a time. his central thesis, if I remember correctly, was that you should be allowed to call someone a spanner if they are indeed being a spanner. His justification was that attacking a post for being spannery is basically the same thing:

From this old thread:

Pighead wrote: »

Ah c'mon babes surely we're not al lthat precious about being called spanners. If somebody says something spannery then surely they deserve to be called a spanner.

And anyway is there even that much differenece betwen attacking posts and posters?

Attacking the poster:

Abigayle: I think that killing everybody over 70 would be a great way to dig ourselves out of this recession. Who's with me?

Pighead: Stop being a spanner Abigayle! If we were to kill all the over 70's it would mean that the bingo callers all around Ireland would be out of a job thus adding yet more numbers to the dole queues.

Attacking the post:

Abigayle: I think that killing everybody over 70 would be a great way to dig ourselves out of this recession. Who's with me?

Pighead: That post is very spannery Abigayle. If we were to kill all the over 70's it would mean that the bingo callers all around Ireland would be out of a job thus adding yet more numbers to the dole queues.

Are you trying to tell Pighead that his reply the second time around was much better than the first one? Nah. Pighead's not having it. Time we toughened up. Obviously if people are getting abused without good reason fierce action should be immediately administered by the Mods but otherwise it's all fair game.

I thought he explained this pretty well.