Rrhain,
I've taken the liberty of summarizing the issue you've presented, and of providing admin response. If this doesn't answer your questions and you feel the need to discuss this further, please stick closely to the issue at hand.
Rrhain in msg 175 writes:
Why is it inappropriate to point out when someone is lying?
Nobody said that. We said it's inappropriate to call someone a liar.
Rrhain in msg 175 writes:
When the forum guidelines make a point of maintaining integrity, not misrepresenting things, etc., why is indicating that someone has violated those standards problematic?
It is OK to point out to a poster that he/she is re-using refuted arguments and to ask for them to address that. If no agreement can be made, then you have two options:
1. Drop it. Some things just aren't that important.
2. Contact the board administration. We can review the case, and take action on anybody who we find to be misrepresenting things
Rrhain in post 186 writes:
You pointed out reasons why a person might want to hesitate before accusing someone of lying, but you didn't say why such an accusation is bad if it can be substantiated.
NOWHERE in here is it necessary to call someone names. That goes for "lying" / "liar", "stupid", or anything else.
Substantiate the meaning behind the name. Show someone what you believe to be the facts and reasons behind the name. Judging from your previous posts, you do this. Once you do this, calling names becomes superfluous. It becomes simply inflammatory. There's no need for inflammatory tactics here, and it won't be tolerated, no matter the form or reason.
Rrhain in post 186 writes:
Why is it against the rules to point out someone going against the rules?
Clearly a false dichotomy. We're talking about calling someone a liar, not "pointing out someone is going against the rules." As pointed out above, there's never a need to call someone a liar. We find name-calling to be inflammatory, unnecessary, and do not put up with it. STOP IT.
Rrhain in post 187 writes:
Are you so afraid of being questioned about your method of governance that you would "sanction" someone who dared to consider that perhaps you were overreaching?
Those who question, and are answered, but are unhappy with the answer and therefore continue the SAME line of questioning are open to board sanctions.
Just to be crystal clear, this summary will act as your answer. If you have genuine, straightforward questions about how to apply it, ask away. If you don't like it and you ask bitchy, inflammatory questions about it, you're going to get suspended.
™ Version 4.2
