5 ms·
I've considered this, and I don't agree with you. This was not a personal attack (the guidelines you posted also don't forbid personal attacks, they discourage
by Hasu 1y ago
I've considered this, and I don't agree with you. This was not a personal attack (the guidelines you posted also don't forbid personal attacks, they discourage name-calling).
Not my site, so please ban my account.
- tomhow 1y agoAll these guidelines are relevant: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. It should be clear that this kind of conduct is not acceptable. We're not banning you, we just need you, like everyone, to keep to the guidelines.
- Hasu 1y agoI think you are poor moderator acting in bad faith, if you think I violated all those guidelines. Is that a personal attack? Is that against the guidelines? I'm not interested in being a part of a community that finds my previous post objectionable. What I said was true and needed to be said. It wasn't kind, but the OP did not deserve or need kindness, he needs a reality check. > It should be clear that this kind of conduct is not acceptable It isn't.