A discussion On What Constitutes Abuse And What Should Be Done About It
-
Does this mean then that every post that mentions politics, sex, or religion should be flagged and reported in here from now on? Or is it just the politics, sex, and religion that some disagree with that? Cos there is plenty that gets brought up in the lounge, plenty that just gets ignored, plenty that leads to interesting, adult discussions. I do not believe that anyone reported the signature in question for flouting the rules, they did so because they object to the anti Isreal sentiment of it. There was an article in the UK recently about how public figures that stand up against Isreal have an unfortunate habit of turning up dead. I myself had a link to a political petition, albeit a local one, in my sig for quite some time. There was no objection or reporting of that that I am aware of.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
And thank you for your honesty and stating what is obviously true. It isn't politics, its the anti Israel right wing sentiment that objectionable, and clearly the attempt to repress it is the most blatant form of bias and mob censoring.
-
In fact and in contrast to your previous sign (which I didn't found abusive) this one I found abusive...And forgive me, but also a bit childish...Sorry to say, but it is much more possible that the new sign will cause a ban on you much faster than the old...
Well, as someone pointed out, swear words are legal in sigs, and this is merely a pictorial representation. Anyway, its meant to be funny. Hopefully you understand that, no? :)
-
Quote:
objectionable
:laugh: I actually found the new link offensive. Now where is that "shrug" emoticon :)
-
Just kick him man. Just just kick him. Such a attitude should be severely dealt with. Even he has removed his signature, the current one points to the image that is also objectionable.
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Such a attitude should be severely dealt with.
Good job you weren't around to see CP in the old days then.
-
How's that for a catchy title? CodeProject is for software developers to discuss software development and their lives as software developers. We all have a broad range of interests, but the focus is on software and we have very deliberately asked the community to keep the discussions vaguely technology related with the emphasis on being respectful and inclusive. Discussions that are controversial or where a more open, direct, glove-off conversation is needed (or wanted) go in the Soapbox. Everyone has the right to free speech. Everyone has the responsibility to respect the site and the community. If you have an axe to grind then take it elsewhere. There are a million sites more suited to political or religious (for example) debates, or at worst start your own blog. That's your right. If you do want to discuss politics or religion (or whatever) then discuss it in the right place, be respectful, and keep those discussions in the forums best suited. That's your responsibility. The specific issue I'd like to address is Munchies_Matt's signature. It's statement and a link to an online petition that is clearly political, religious and divisive. It's there purely for attention, and I'm sure he's wriggling with joy that we're discussing him. That's the only purpose of the sig: to stir up a fight. The reaction has been varied. The signature breaches the rules of the Lounge and can be interpreted to breach the site's Terms of Service and I've asked him to remove the signature. Other reactions have ranged from pointing out that the sig should be changed to wholesale closing of all messages by the user. I, personally, aren't interested in a person who just wants to increase my workload without giving back anything to the software developer world. There are way too many extremely talented, generous and generally wonderful human beings contributing day in and day out who I need to give my time to. However, before I do anything I wanted hear from the community. Society evolves, as do we, so let's hear from you as to how we as a community should approach a situation like this.
cheers Chris Maunder
I trust that if the "compassionately common sense" view of many CodeProject Members, and CodeProject staff, is that any statement is an egregious violation of the pro-social norms of the context in which it is placed: the content should be removed, and the poster warned it is inappropriate. If the poster continues to post the same kind of content, then I think the poster should be banned. I am much more concerned about the daily abuse I witness on QA, than I am about what goes down in the Lounge.
-
In fact and in contrast to your previous sign (which I didn't found abusive) this one I found abusive...And forgive me, but also a bit childish...Sorry to say, but it is much more possible that the new sign will cause a ban on you much faster than the old...
-
Well, as someone pointed out, swear words are legal in sigs, and this is merely a pictorial representation. Anyway, its meant to be funny. Hopefully you understand that, no? :)
It isn't the words that matters, but the purpose of them. Your old sig wasn't offensive, your new one was. Especially as the address was a bit unclear if you haven't followed the whole mess. Good thing you removed it.
-
Well, as someone pointed out, swear words are legal in sigs, and this is merely a pictorial representation. Anyway, its meant to be funny. Hopefully you understand that, no? :)
No problem...
-
I trust that if the "compassionately common sense" view of many CodeProject Members, and CodeProject staff, is that any statement is an egregious violation of the pro-social norms of the context in which it is placed: the content should be removed, and the poster warned it is inappropriate. If the poster continues to post the same kind of content, then I think the poster should be banned. I am much more concerned about the daily abuse I witness on QA, than I am about what goes down in the Lounge.
BillWoodruff wrote:
I am much more concerned about the daily abuse I witness on QA, than I am about what goes down in the Lounge.
Now, that is certainly something I agree with.
-
Is this one better?
A bit flat, but I can't see how one can find THAT abusive! :-D
-
Its supposed to be funny, seeing it is aimed at the univoters. :)
I did get that ... which is why I didn't report it and shrugged off the (only slightly) offensive nature of the image :) It actually made me laugh out loud at the implied message to the univoters :-D And at the end of the day ... it was my own choice to follow the link!
-
Is this one better?
I hope you realize that no signatures displayed now... ;)
-
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Such a attitude should be severely dealt with.
Good job you weren't around to see CP in the old days then.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
you weren't around to see CP in the old days then.
So you still believe that something that was considered valid in past days should also be considered valid these days? Why? You or me not there to decide what is right and wrong. Its community. Community always runs on majority concensus. Chris,even if he is Admin and owner of this place, respects the community and as a result,this thread has been started.Further, i don't know why you have problem having decent sign? Why not a single effort to win all's heart and ofcourse make Admins happy? Try it and there are still chance that you will be able to see the beauty of CP.
-
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
I would still like to ask if the rules are supposed to be strictly implemented or are they rather more intended to be a guideline
The only rule I ask everyone to stick to diligently is the rule of common sense. It's usually obvious when someone is just mentioning something without intent to make a big deal about it and when someone is just looking for attention and stirring the pot just for the sake of it.
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
As a followup question, are we really supposed to report every message that doesn't follow the rules as we interpret them, or would you prefer that we just tell people to bring it to the soapbox instead and bring out the heavy artillery for repeat offenders that simply don't care
That's pretty much how it works now, and it seems to work well.
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
And should it really be enough to kill a post if just one person decides that they feel offended whether real or imagined
That's the tricky bit. Yes if it's a spammer. No if it's a person venting frustration. If only I could write code that could tell the two apart (though our spam blocker is getting better and better)
cheers Chris Maunder
The problem with common sense is that it isn't that common. It's mostly culturally determined.
-
I did get that ... which is why I didn't report it and shrugged off the (only slightly) offensive nature of the image :) It actually made me laugh out loud at the implied message to the univoters :-D And at the end of the day ... it was my own choice to follow the link!
At least someone sees the humour! :)
-
I hope you realize that no signatures displayed now... ;)
It seems as if we have all lost our signatures. :confused: Has Chris done a blanket ban on them despite the overwhelming support for my sig in this thread? Seems so.
-
It seems as if we have all lost our signatures. :confused: Has Chris done a blanket ban on them despite the overwhelming support for my sig in this thread? Seems so.
He maybe wanted a silent night ;)
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
you weren't around to see CP in the old days then.
So you still believe that something that was considered valid in past days should also be considered valid these days? Why? You or me not there to decide what is right and wrong. Its community. Community always runs on majority concensus. Chris,even if he is Admin and owner of this place, respects the community and as a result,this thread has been started.Further, i don't know why you have problem having decent sign? Why not a single effort to win all's heart and ofcourse make Admins happy? Try it and there are still chance that you will be able to see the beauty of CP.
I was just saying that in the old days CP was much rowdier than it is today, and that if you found my sig so shocking then if yo9u were here in 2006/2007 you would have been mortified!
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Community always runs on majority concensus
And the majority concenss is that my sig is perfectly valid thus you have to go along with that. :)
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Chris,even if he is Admin and owner of this place
He is, but also has to follow the rules of the members, because without members, there is no CP.
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Why not a single effort to win all's heart
Because some people, like me, aren't interested in 'winning hearts'. We are interested in challenging the system, pushing boundaries, upsetting apple carts. Its my generation, the generation that gave the world the sex pistols and punk rock. Its just the way we are, ok? :)
-
I was just saying that in the old days CP was much rowdier than it is today, and that if you found my sig so shocking then if yo9u were here in 2006/2007 you would have been mortified!
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Community always runs on majority concensus
And the majority concenss is that my sig is perfectly valid thus you have to go along with that. :)
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Chris,even if he is Admin and owner of this place
He is, but also has to follow the rules of the members, because without members, there is no CP.
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Why not a single effort to win all's heart
Because some people, like me, aren't interested in 'winning hearts'. We are interested in challenging the system, pushing boundaries, upsetting apple carts. Its my generation, the generation that gave the world the sex pistols and punk rock. Its just the way we are, ok? :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
We are interested in challenging the system
Don't try this on Codeproject.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Its my generation, the generation that gave the world the sex pistols and punk rock. Its just the way we are
You should better be at home than a CP and keep your generation with you. Push boundaries at home.
-
I was just saying that in the old days CP was much rowdier than it is today, and that if you found my sig so shocking then if yo9u were here in 2006/2007 you would have been mortified!
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Community always runs on majority concensus
And the majority concenss is that my sig is perfectly valid thus you have to go along with that. :)
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Chris,even if he is Admin and owner of this place
He is, but also has to follow the rules of the members, because without members, there is no CP.
Rohan Leuva wrote:
Why not a single effort to win all's heart
Because some people, like me, aren't interested in 'winning hearts'. We are interested in challenging the system, pushing boundaries, upsetting apple carts. Its my generation, the generation that gave the world the sex pistols and punk rock. Its just the way we are, ok? :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Because some people, like me, aren't interested in 'winning hearts'. We are interested in challenging
Congratulations. You succeeded. Sigs are turned off.
