No Personal Attacks!!!

[KathyTX]

The DIS posting guidelines have always stated that personal attacks, insults, fighting and sarcasm aimed at other posters are not permitted here. Alex has posted reminders about these guidelines in recent days.

There are several posters active on this forum who are really pushing the limits, and who in normal times would have probably be banned by now. Due to the high emotional level of the current crisis, we've been much more lax in allowing the venting to go further than normal.

If you want to remain an active poster on the DIS boards, play nice.

No personal attacks.
No insults.
No sarcasm.

Discuss a topic and play nice. But the fighting has to stop.

 

[JimMIA]

You might want to tell "Webmaster Alex" to go back and read those postings. Many of Alex' comments about police officers are insulting to a lot of us.

 

[Bob NC]

You might want to tell "Webmaster Alex" to go back and read those postings. Many of Alex' comments about police officers are insulting to a lot of us.

Maybe that's who she's talking about?

 

[KathyTX]

No. I'm talking about posters who are aiming insults directly at other DIS posters.

I reviewed the thread you're complaining about. I did see some personal attacks and insults aimed at posters on this board, but none of those were posted by Alex.

 

[JimMIA]

I know the stated purpose of this board was to allow people to deal with some of their feelings about these tragic events, and it was felt that the speed with which these boards move sometimes would inhibit that. The idea being, that if there was one place to go, threads would not get lost in the flow. It's been a huge success...

Unfortunately, it's been so successful, y'all might want to consider splitting this board into two parts -- one for people who want to inquire about providing/getting assistance -- and the other for those who want to discuss the politics or whatever of the situation.

There are people who legitimately want to give and receive help, and there are others who legitimately want to discuss issues, and it might be helpful to separate them so everybody's input could receive better exposure.

 

[auntpolly]

I know the stated purpose of this board was to allow people to deal with some of their feelings about these tragic events, and it was felt that the speed with which these boards move sometimes would inhibit that. The idea being, that if there was one place to go, threads would not get lost in the flow. It's been a huge success...

Unfortunately, it's been so successful, y'all might want to consider splitting this board into two parts -- one for people who want to inquire about providing/getting assistance -- and the other for those who want to discuss the politics or whatever of the situation.

There are people who legitimately want to give and receive help, and there are others who legitimately want to discuss issues, and it might be helpful to separate them so everybody's input could receive better exposure.

Make that 3! I could use one just for complaining about stuff!

Webmaster Kathy, if you can weed out the sarcasm from the passive agressive, more power to you!

 

[KathyTX]

Webmaster Kathy, if you can weed out the sarcasm from the passive agressive, more power to you!

We're going to have to just start with the outright attacks.

Passive-aggressive digs and the more subtle nastiness will have to wait for phase 2.

 

[shortbun]

That's no personal attacks on other Disers, right? Obviously, attacking unknown people is ok, ie police, politicians, bad parents, misbehaving children and so forth.
Also, I don't see how the sarcasm part can be enforced. It seems like almost every political thread is dripping with sarcasm. So would this be interpreted as sarcasm...
A poster says everyone should respect the president and someone else posts "riiiight! " ? I mean, if there's no sarcasm allowed, then maybe the rolling eyed smilies should disappear, eh? This one too?
Could the drinking smilies also be construed as sarcasm? I think I might have to leave the DIS-not sarcastic, was supposed to be humorous. That's another thing, one person's humor might seem like sarcasm to another.


ETA Sorry, some of my questions were answered while I composed my post.

 

[cati]

I agree with you Kathy.

 

[Planogirl]

I'm just really grateful that the DIS set up this board. I think that a lot of people needed this; I know that I did.

 

[C.Ann]

Could "loftiness" be Phase 3? Please, please, pretty please?

 

[Microcell]

I think I offended on two counts! I was sarcastic and insulting all in one post. I will change mine.

 

[Saffron]

Seriously WMKathy. One person's sarcasm is another's person's humor. I know when someone has been insulting, we all do, but I think sarcasm is something that is totally subjective. How would we know what's over the line and what's acceptable when it come to sarcasm?

And I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all!

 

[KathyTX]

How would we know what's over the line and what's acceptable when it come to sarcasm?

Fair question. Humorous sarcasm is okay. Hurtful and insulting sarcasm is a problem. There is a gray area in between, but the outright stinging and hateful kind of sarcasm is the sort that's a problem here.

 

[SherryNC]

I mean, if there's no sarcasm allowed, then maybe the rolling eyed smilies should disappear, eh? This one too?
Could the drinking smilies also be construed as sarcasm?

Now that is just plain crazy talk.

 

[Free4Life11]

NO! They had the argument about the roll eyes smiley on another message board....sure it's rude, that's why so many of us love it! It just says SO much more than words sometimes...

 

[NeverEnufWDW]

Careful folks - next we'll all be reprogrammed for "thoughtcrime".