PainRack posted: The problem isn't showing common courtesy. Its the problem that many people on this forum has insulted the intergrity of several posters, whoose only "crime" is to point out that the numbers and rationalisations given to support 3 million are wrong. I know that many of the involved posters who have been wrongfully accused would GLADLY ignore any such ugly accusations if the discussion can be reverted to a meaningful one, including one where Karen returns to this forum.
PainRack posted: For the last time, its not about apologies. Its for people to stand up onto the line and either prove that me, Sharky, or any other number of person who has been accused of flaming Karen, or to show that this "Saxtonite" group has flamed karen.
PainRack posted: However, as long as people interpret "disagreeing with karen" to be equivalent to name-calling, insults and etc etc, there isn't a point. And frankly, as long as this "people has flamed karen" attitude remains on this forum, there will always be this invisible witch-hunt out here.
Master_Keralys posted: You're completely wrong. The problem is not an either/or, PainRack. It is a BOTH. Yes, the integrity of certain posters on this forum was attacked. The fact that insulting and name-calling came out of a comment on Qu_Klaani is indicative of how heated the situation here is. ALL parties are at fault. NOT just us. NOT just you. EVERYONE.
No, he apologized because he found that there was no reason for such claim. As a courteous individual, he felt it behooved him to apologize for a mischaracterization that had been made that could be construed as character assassination - except he didn't intend it that way. When he found that there was no evidence that you had flamed her, he apologized for making the suggestion that you had. Why do you get offended over someone saying that as far as they can see, you're right? *confused look*
As Borleias pointed out, the less mods have to be mods the better (within reason; I personally have no desire to see this place look anything like SDN). People did insult Karen on this board after she left. The evidence is gone now, but I read the posts. Honestly, though, I don't really care about that so much - most particularly as neither does she.
What I do care about is this: this argument rapidly escalated into one of the most heated and furious debates, with name-calling at other posters on both sides of the argument - calling someone a "lying idiot" simply because they chose a different (yet viable) position to argue comes to mind.
What is the out-of-bounds marker? Insulting the VIP's character, intelligence, or ability to think. That's my opinion. You can disagree all you want. But don't call the VIP stupid because they disagree with you. That's the line. Don't insult someone for having a different view from you. Disagree as much as you want. Just don't insult them. Is that a clear enough statement of what we want? - Keralys
PainRack posted: Only if the person in question didn't lie. QM explictly chose to obfusacte the issue by calling Ku a flamer, when he didn't flame Karen.
PainRack posted: There isn't a "all parties are at fault here". Nobody here insulted Karen. Nobody flamed her.
PainRack posted: Except no one insulted Karen or called her stupid. No one insulted her character or intelligence.
PainRack posted: But don't expect me to sign a pledge that assigns blame to some non-existent people, because that would be telling a lie.
PainRack posted:I have repeatedly asked what is the out of bound marker. You and others has defined it essentially as "don't disagree with the author."
Master_of_Ossus posted:Painrack, settle down. None of the people who originally advocated the pledge now believe that Ms. Traviss was flamed during her stint here--I think they've all acknowledged that. In fact, none of them are even accusing you or anyone else of driving her off the boards--that view was abandoned long ago in this thread when it was recognized to be false (mainly through Keralys' efforts).
Havac posted:EDIT: Kudzu, Q_M, please step back. I realize you're frustrated. But it isn't helping. Your behavior is the kind of thing we're trying to get rid of. Civility, please. No baiting. No veiled insults.
Kudzu posted:Bull. We've defined it as "don't disrespect the author", and there's a frellin' fine line between disagreeing and disrespecting. If you cannot differentiate between the two, you might consider stepping back and analyzing for a moment. Disagreement and disrespect are quite different, and while I can certainly handle people disagreeing with me, it irritates me to no end when people launch personal attacks on me for my argument, especially over such ridiculously trivial matters of science fiction.