MTG Salvation

Quote from urzassedatives

Calling another member a sociopath shouldn't be tolerated in debate. That doesn't allow for intelligent discussion.

Well, its not like debate has special flame rules or something, or does it? It always did seem a little more strict than the rest of the forums.
Labeling someone with a mental disorder like that anywhere is not tolerated... correct?
If not, then where not?

You know where Taylor.

Might be a good time to nip those comments in the bud before they get warning-worthy.

I've seen fairly lax moderation in most places. Mind, most of those are moderated by me, and are lax for a reason.

Quote from The Cadet

You know where Taylor.

but i cant join

Quote from The Cadet

You know where Taylor.

That's not what I meant at all. I was just saying that a few posts back on this thread:

Quote from The Fallen One

you're insane

Just happened a few posts ago(to viberunner).
Calling another individual insane (for their opinions) is the same thing as

Quote from urzassedatives

Calling another individual a sociopath (for their opinions)

.

So, since no action was taking with one, but action was taking with the other, I was wondering if it had something to do with one event taking place in debate and the other in SYM.

Debate DID always strike me as a more strict place, I was wounding if it had special flaming rules or something.

Debate should be more strict as its a debate. Any insults to someone in a debate is one step too far in a debate where there is a crap ton of people.

This is spam?

Quote from heroicraptor

This is spam?

Yes yes it is, because you mistook the premise of the OP and responded with information that had no relation to the case (question regarded pre-8th as such talking about stuff thats past 8th is off topic, it could be considered spam, and it seems extreme took it as so, i would have given a warning but im not mod :p)

Quote from heroicraptor

This is spam?

You didn't read the thread, so what you posted added nothing to the discussion.
You didn't get an infraction anyway.

Quote from Sapphire Tri

Debate should be more strict as its a debate. Any insults to someone in a debate is one step too far in a debate where there is a crap ton of people.

So, are you saying:
"Yes, debate has a stricter set of flame rules than other parts of the forum. Calling someone insane there will get you an infraction, but not in other places." ?

I am not planning on calling anyone crazy, I just want to be clear on the rules and all that.

Edit:
Maybe I am missing the subtle difference between "Sociopath" and "insane."
I am thinking they mean more or less the same thing since Sociopath is such a loosely defined term. Is that the difference I am missing, not which forum it took place on, but he word itself?

lol, are you serious? this site would be better without mods? hahahaha you're insane, without mods this site would go to hell, it would be nothing but a huge spamming and flaming-fest, do you have any experience with forums at all?

Well, this is the block of text I am talking about. I think its pretty clear the author is not calling the IDEA crazy, but the person themselves.

'Course I am bad at reading comprehension.

I am not sure you will believe me,(or care) but I am sorry I am obsessing about this. I just hate not understanding something.....

Quote from Taylor

Well, this is the block of text I am talking about. I think its pretty clear the author is not calling the IDEA crazy, but the person themselves.

'Course I am bad at reading comprehension.

I am not sure you will believe me,(or care) but I am sorry I am obsessing about this. I just hate not understanding something.....

You are obsessing.
And the post on this thread wasn't a malicious attack, the comment taken within the context of the post was more in jest.
It is all about the tone and context, and the context of the sociopath post was malicious and unecessary. The context of the post you linked was less serious, and he explained himself within the post, which also helps greatly.

Also, the specific term of sociopath is much more inflammatory than the clinically inprecise and socially rampant term 'insane'. (I have to use my Psych degree somewhere...)

Quote from urzassedatives

You are obsessing.

Yeah, I know, its a problem I have. I am trying to work on it.

Quote from urzassedatives

And the post on this thread wasn't a malicious attack, the comment taken within the context of the post was more in jest.
It is all about the tone and context, and the context of the sociopath post was malicious and unecessary. The context of the post you linked was less serious, and he explained himself within the post, which also helps greatly.

Also, the specific term of sociopath is much more inflammatory than the clinically inprecise and socially rampant term 'insane'. (I have to use my Psych degree somewhere...)

Thank you. This makes sense to me, and was what I was looking for. I know my method of getting answers by asking questions can be tiresome. Thank you for your response.

Quote from Doktorcaligari

Dear Taylor,

The concepts expressed by Sapphire Tri and further detailed in my previous post have been put in quite clear terms, which means that I faithfully believe they allow instantaneous compreension by the typical psychographic profile of an average Salvation poster.

Furthermore, as you are known to argue about technicalities for an extremely excessive number of posts, I will end up this discussion here, as I am not fond of arguing for the sake of it.

Should such simple concepts still remain unclear to yourself, I suggest that you ask a SYM moderator why the post you are citing wasn't infracted and why.

Dear Dr. Caligari,

I am sorry if you feel that I play devils advocate just for the heck of it. I can only say that I argue or ask questions because I genuinely want to know the answer, or find out why the other person thinks the way they do. I found urzassedatives' last post to be the one that made me understand, not the posts before it. If that makes me 'dumber' in your eyes than the average salvation poster, then so be it.

I know I can get obsessive when it comes to technicalities, but I do not find any detail that leads someone to a conclusion to be insignificant. It is often in the details that an error or misunderstanding takes place.

To answer your final paragraph, that is exactly what I did a post ago.

All I can say is I recommend using the 'ignore' option and then reading quoted posts. I know I have gotten good at over looking peoples posts I don't like to read.

I have only once reported a post that flamed ME.

I know its not up to me, but I would ask that Doktorcaligari does not get his perfect record ruined for that post. I am not offended by it. (and it does not seem infraction or warn worthy, IMO)

Quote from Taylor

I know its not up to me, but I would ask that Doktorcaligari does not get his perfect record ruined for that post. I am not offended by it. (and it does not seem infraction or warn worthy, IMO)

You were just arguing over the minutae of posts which were deemed as flames or not flames, and you say that a direct attack on you as a person is not infraction or warn worthy?
I am closing this thread. It has caused enough trouble, but you seriously need to think over the way you post and conduct yourself on the internet while you are away for lent. Your hypocracy is showing.