I agree, I have no time for those who are simply critical and don't have anything constructive to say.Scott wrote: Those kind of rule violations tend to be a symptom of one's weak argument,
How long?
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: How long?
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: How long?
Criticism can be constructive or not, indeed.Harbal wrote:I agree, I have no time for those who are simply critical and don't have anything constructive to say.Scott wrote: Those kind of rule violations tend to be a symptom of one's weak argument,
My concern is even more specific than that. If a friend makes constructive personal criticism to a friend in everyday life (e.g. "Bobby, my dear friend, I suggest you change into your red shirt as you look much better in red.") that can be helpful. In contrast, on this site under the terms of which one uses the site, the purpose is not to exchange pleasantries or personal advice with each other. In theory, even compliments are prohibited as they are equally off-topic, let alone constructive personal criticism. The more highlighted issue is whether what is being discussed--and potentially constructively critiqued--is the issues and philosophy or other members. This site isn't for discussing each other, either positively or negatively and either constructive or not. The rules here are meant to be great rules for discussions in all walks of life. They are meant to be the rules for here. Those who wish to critique or compliment others personally, constructively or not, would be wise to find another website or another medium altogether. This site is for people who want to debate and discuss even the most controversial or disagreeable topics free from personal attacks, ad hominem arguments and other off-topic crap.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: How long?
Who decides what is or is not off-topic crap and what criteria are applied?
Regards Leo
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: How long?
The forum rules. The link to the forum rules is in the upper-left-hand side of every page on the forums.Obvious Leo wrote:what criteria are applied?
The moderator looking at the report/post.Obvious Leo wrote:Who decides
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: How long?
Obvious Leo wrote:Scott. Is it the case that ad hominem attacks are only acted upon if somebody complains, as you told me a long time ago?
- Spiral Out
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am
Re: How long?
Perhaps a modicum of humility might serve one's cause somewhat better than this sort of high self-regard.Obvious Leo wrote:Do you want me to take my bat and ball and go and play elsewhere, Scott? Is that what you're trying to do? If so I suggest you first take a closer look at what I'm trying to say around the joint. There are a lot of people very interested in what I have to say, and I in turn am very interested in what they have to say about what I have to say. There is some serious high-octane philosophy going on on your website which you appear to be unaware of. It might never have crossed your mind that a philosopher might turn up one day who has actually written his own philosophy but are you quite certain that showing such a philosopher the door is such a smart idea?
Before you do something you might later on regret I suggest you consult with some of the people who are actually reading my stuff.
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: How long?
I have long ago apologised for my transgression to the complainant and I consider that the end of the matter. Obviously Scott does not but since he has made no attempt to explain why not we are surely free to draw our own conclusions.
Regards Leo
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: How long?
I don't recall saying that. Rather, such ad hominem attacks may or not be acted upon without a complaint. It mainly depends whether or not a moderator happens to stumble upon it. The forum rules instruct members to always report such rule violations, as that is the only way to be sure a moderator sees it. Thus, filing a report is the only way to be sure a moderator acts on it. For those reasons, the Procedure for Complaining about Moderator Actions instruct to not make broad complaints about there being posts still on the site with rule violations in them, but rather to report such posts or only to complain when a post your reported is not deleted but the report is closed.Obvious Leo wrote:And the answer to this question as well please.
Obvious Leo wrote:Scott. Is it the case that ad hominem attacks are only acted upon if somebody complains, as you told me a long time ago?
-- Updated 12 May 2015 07:48 pm to add the following --
Perhaps that was how we handled the matter for the other 20 or so "transgressions" for which you were formally warned before the most recent transgression in question. How many times should that be the process? More to the real issue, where in the forum rules does it say that repeated violations will be met with a request for an apology? It doesn't. I don't see the word apology in the forum rules at all. It says they will be met with a ban, not a request for an apology. Instead of banning you, I have put you on the moderation queue.Obvious Leo wrote:I have long ago apologised for my transgression to the complainant and I consider that the end of the matter. Obviously Scott does not but since he has made no attempt to explain why not we are surely free to draw our own conclusions
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: How long?
It was a long time ago on an occasion when I pleaded provocation for an ad hominem attack which had been directed at me. I even admitted to you that I didn't regard this as a good enough excuse for retaliation in kind and it was then that you pointed out that if no complaint is made then no action will be taken. That basically leaves me out in the wilderness fending for myself because such an action would be morally abhorrent to me. Nevertheless I still accept that retaliation in kind is not the right way to deal with a personal affront and by and large I manage to ignore them as they arise. However I do suggest that you read the thread in which this unfortunate fiasco began. We're not talking about a snide remark or a casual throw-away insult, which most of us can take in our stride as part of the cut and thrust of lively debate and often even quite amusing. The complainant on this occasion had hurled insults of the most malicious and derogatory kind, not just at me but also at a number of other contributors. I shouldn't have snapped back, I'll wear that and I've already apologised for it, but this selective application of the rules reflects no credit on the credibility of this forum.Scott wrote:I don't recall saying that.
Regards Leo
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: How long?
This complaint is inappropriate per the Procedure for Complaining about Moderator Actions. Don't complain that moderators do not take action on posts you believe are rule-breaking if you haven't reported those posts as rule-breaking.Obvious Leo wrote:this selective application of the rules reflects no credit on the credibility of this forum.
Per the forum rules, if you reply to a post, you are personally voting that you think it is not a rule-breaking post.
-- Updated 12 May 2015 08:25 pm to add the following --
That is not how to file a report because it is too inefficient a system and too error-prone. To file a report, you click the upside-down exclamation point on the upper-right-hand part of the post you wish to report. That is how you suggest a moderator read a post to see if the post is rule-violating.Obvious Leo wrote: I do suggest that you read the thread
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- Spiral Out
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am
Re: How long?
I hope members will utilize these valuable resources more often and when necessary so that we can all improve our interactions and communication here in these forums.
Please use the link (offered again below) and the report button that Scott has provided to follow this procedure and improve the operations of this site!
Thank you.
Procedure for Complaining about Moderator Actions
- Neopolitan
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: January 27th, 2013, 7:57 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: The one who asks
- Contact:
Re: How long?
I am willing to accept this lesson and move forward into a future that doesn't have me using red font in warning messages. Unless there was some other lesson you wished me to learn?
By the way, I do like the change from "Main Philosophy Forums" to "Argumentative Philosophy Forums".
-- Updated May 15th, 2015, 8:50 pm to add the following --
Actually, it seems that I am not on double secret probation ... ? I just chose the wrong person to send a PM to (ie someone who is actually on double secret probation, perhaps) or the PM system is flaky. I just tried again and was able to send a PM without getting a "You are sending a PM to too many recipients" - which sends a rather odd message when there is only one recipient. Nevertheless, as someone who thought they were on double secret probation, the points above still apply - you need to let people know when they've been sanctioned, otherwise we don't know whether we've been sanctioned or there's something wrong with the forum or the internet gods are using us as their playthings.
I have been throttled though, unable to send two posts in reasonably quick succession. Is that a whole of forum thing?
- neopolitan || neophilosophical.blogspot.com
- The one who called himself God is, and always has been - Ariel Parik
I am just going outside and may be some time - Oates (Antarctica, 1912)
It was fun while it lasted ...
- The one who called himself God is, and always has been - Ariel Parik
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: How long?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: How long?
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: How long?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023