Personal Attacks (split from Transgender athletes)

[Holmes]

16 hours ago, iNow said:

Incorrect again. The reference was to your ignorance… your lack of knowledge, education, or awareness… on a specific topic. Perhaps you took offense to this, but it’s not an insult. Had Charon instead called you an idiot, stupid, or even a moronic fool, then that would’ve been accurately described as an insult, but none of those things happened. 

Have you identified the common variable across threads yet?

Yes I have, it is your tendency to act like a bully, I've seen it before, dealt with bullies before, this is what I see in your behavior.

 

6 hours ago, iNow said:

So long as the athlete meets the criteria for the class, you let them compete alongside the gender with which they identify. This isn’t hard. It’s just a game… erm… a sport.

And if the criteria is to be a woman then that's the end of the matter, they cannot participate because they do not meet the criteria, this isn't hard.

Edited July 6, 2021 by Holmes

[zapatos]

17 minutes ago, Holmes said:

And if the criteria is to be a woman then that's the end of the matter, they cannot participate because they do not meet the criteria, this isn't hard.

If it were only so simple. No matter what others keep presenting, you think that YOUR definition of a 'woman' is all that matters. Unfortunately you are not the boss of the world and you cannot dictate to others.

[Holmes]

17 minutes ago, zapatos said:

If it were only so simple. No matter what others keep presenting, you think that YOUR definition of a 'woman' is all that matters. Unfortunately you are not the boss of the world and you cannot dictate to others.

Please show me the post(s) where I said my definitions are the only ones that matter? where did I say or imply I was the "boss"? where have I "dictated"?

Please stop attacking me, is that really asking too much?

Edited July 6, 2021 by Holmes

[Phi for All]

16 hours ago, iNow said:

Incorrect again. The reference was to your ignorance… your lack of knowledge, education, or awareness… on a specific topic. Perhaps you took offense to this, but it’s not an insult.

!

Moderator Note

To clarify this reported post, we've debated at length on this in the past. Pointing out a lack of knowledge is NOT an insult, it's NOT a personal attack, and it doesn't violate our civility rules. We're all here to learn. Calling a specific lack of knowledge "ignorance" is accurate.

Care must be taken to properly highlight the lack, of course. When calling someone "ignorant", the implication is that we're focused on a specific lack of knowledge, something one is "ignorant" of, and NOT judging the whole person that way. Perhaps this is where the friction lies. People can do and say stupid/dumb/ignorant/moronic things, but for the purposes of our discussions, nobody is an idiot or a moron. The whole person isn't ignorant.

 

[zapatos]

1 minute ago, Holmes said:

Please show me the post(s) where I said my definitions are the only ones that matter?

I based my comment on your previous post where you implied a trans woman wouldn't be considered to "be a woman".

Quote

 

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, Holmes said:

Please stop attacking me, is that really asking too much?

!

Moderator Note

Again, this is not what's happening. Your stances, your arguments, the things you claim are all fair game. We attack ideas ruthlessly, to make sure they can survive. We don't attack people. YOU ARE NOT YOUR IDEAS.

 

[Holmes]

Just now, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

Again, this is not what's happening. Your stances, your arguments, the things you claim are all fair game. We attack ideas ruthlessly, to make sure they can survive. We don't attack people. YOU ARE NOT YOUR IDEAS.

 

I do not see how:

"You think that YOUR definition of a 'woman' is all that matters" 

"Unfortunately you are not the boss of the world"

"You cannot dictate to others"

Can be described as not a personal attack. None of these address my arguments or claims.

I am leaving the forum at this point, I have no desire to deal with moderators who tolerate and encourage the posting of personal insults.

 

[Phi for All]

7 minutes ago, Holmes said:

I do not see how:

"You think that YOUR definition of a 'woman' is all that matters" 

"Unfortunately you are not the boss of the world"

"You cannot dictate to others"

Can be described as not a personal attack. None of these address my arguments or claims.

I am leaving the forum at this point, I have no desire to deal with moderators who tolerate and encourage the posting of personal insults.

!

Moderator Note

This isn't the post you reported. It's not the post I commented on. 

Your behavior is fair game as well. If you act like your opinion is the only one that matters, it's not a personal attack to point that out. It's something you can change, not something that's intrinsic to your entire being. 

I usually leave the members to hash out their own discussions, but mods respond to reported posts. It's part of the protocols we're paid so handsomely to follow.

 

[Holmes]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

This isn't the post you reported. It's not the post I commented on. 

Your behavior is fair game as well. If you act like your opinion is the only one that matters, it's not a personal attack to point that out. It's something you can change, not something that's intrinsic to your entire being. 

I usually leave the members to hash out their own discussions, but mods respond to reported posts. It's part of the protocols we're paid so handsomely to follow.

 

I asked Zapatos to stop the personal attacks, I did that in this post:

You then posted this:

I replied to that rather ignorant post with this:

But then we have yet more ignorance, ignorance of the facts:

So you are either blind, incompetent, ignorant or just rather dim, how you conned your way into being designated a moderator is a mystery.

There are people hurling personal insults around, you are either dim or in fact secretly want them to say these things to me.

Yes I KNOW THAT IS NOT THE POST I REPORTED but it is the post that you referred to when you defended Zapatos after he made three accusations against me.

You are on record as actively defending posts that do not attack someone's argument but do attack their character and intelligence, so its fair game, you are ignorant and you want to see others insult me because you disagree with something I said somewhere.

This is so obvious, you lack integrity, honesty, decency and are too cowardly to enforce a rather simple rule.

Now go f**k yourself.

 

 

Edited July 6, 2021 by Holmes

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

Spilt to its own thread in Suggestions....

 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Holmes said:

I am leaving the forum at this point, I have no desire to deal with moderators who tolerate and encourage the posting of personal insults.

Oh, the delicious irony. Given that lovely outburst in your last post, you quite likely will be leaving the forum whether you want to or not. 😂 

[Holmes]

34 minutes ago, iNow said:

Oh, the delicious irony. Given that lovely outburst in your last post, you quite likely will be leaving the forum whether you want to or not. 😂 

 

Another vacuous post from the local ignoramous I see.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Holmes said:

Another vacuous post from the local ignoramous I see.

Let me quote you: 

3 hours ago, Holmes said:

Please stop attacking me, is that really asking too much?

 

[beecee]

3 hours ago, Holmes said:

Please show me the post(s) where I said my definitions are the only ones that matter? where did I say or imply I was the "boss"? where have I "dictated"?

Please stop attacking me, is that really asking too much?

This is a science forum. You come here attempting to undermine/deride science in favour of other unscientific myths, and then cry blue murder, when criticised? You offer nothing but philosophical claptrap, without any scientific evidence to support your myths and then again cry "victim"? 

Let me give you another quote which apparently you object too...

[Holmes]

1 minute ago, beecee said:

This is a science forum. You come here attempting to undermine/deride science in favour of other unscientific myths, and then cry blue murder, when criticised?

You offer nothing but philosophical claptrap, without any scientific evidence to support your myths and then again cry "victim"? 

Let me give you another quote which apparently you object too...

Not a quote in sight, just foot stamping and emotional outbursts.

Did I undermine science? quote me.

Did I propose anything mythical? quote me.

Did I post "claptrap"? quote me.

You post a quote like that yet I bet you cannot even begin to define what "understand" means can you?

 

[beecee]

22 minutes ago, Holmes said:

Not a quote in sight, just foot stamping and emotional outbursts.

Did I undermine science? quote me.

Did I propose anything mythical? quote me.

Did I post "claptrap"? quote me.

You post a quote like that yet I bet you cannot even begin to define what "understand" means can you?

 

I'll let my peers on this forum answer your questions. 

Let me say though, it is sad that you apparently have become so bitter and disasapointed over the crtique that your many claims have received. Again, in case you missed it the first time around, this is a science forum, and while I am no scientist [or philosopher] I do my best to adhere to the scientific methodology.

[MigL]

Did I miss anything  ?

[J.C.MacSwell]

There are a lot of people of various backgrounds, from many parts of the world, that come to post here. For many it takes time to understand what the Mods here deem acceptable and what they do not, and accept that the arbitrary rules are fair or could be. In fact up to that point many might argue, and many have, that they aren't.

It's not always clear that no disrespect was stated or intended, when it's pretty clear no respect was intended, and different words hold different connotations for many people. "Ignorance" is one of them.

Just my $0.02 and probably overpriced.

[iNow]

I’m ignorant of a great tremendous many things. I am not, however, an ignorant person. Anyone interested in philosophy should not only appreciate these important nuances in the way words get used, but ought also to celebrate the open respectful clarification of them. 

And now we almost have a nickel between us. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by iNow

[MigL]

For future consideration ...
'You are 'gnorant' is ambiguous.
'You are ignorant of such-and-such a fact' is not.

But certainly people should stop being so sensitive, and easily offended; this is a place to exchange opinions ( among other things ).
As Prof. J Peterson says, when you have an opinion, you're bound to offend some people.
( the alternative is not to have an opinion, or be denied an opinion, which is much worse )

[dimreepr]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

For future consideration ...
'You are 'gnorant' is ambiguous.
'You are ignorant of such-and-such a fact' is not.

Indeed, such-and-such a fact that is ignorant of it's ambiguity...

[swansont]

25 minutes ago, MigL said:

For future consideration ...
'You are 'gnorant' is ambiguous.
'You are ignorant of such-and-such a fact' is not.

But certainly people should stop being so sensitive, and easily offended; this is a place to exchange opinions ( among other things ).
As Prof. J Peterson says, when you have an opinion, you're bound to offend some people.
( the alternative is not to have an opinion, or be denied an opinion, which is much worse )

The line that set this off is "This types of comments just indicate ignorance." and in the context of the exchange, the topic was already known, so it was not (or should not have been) ambiguous to those in the conversation.

What was being discussed was based in science, so it's much less of an opinion and much more about what you can support.

————

 

But Phi is absolutely correct: being called ignorant is not a personal attack in the context of our rules if it refers to some issue being discussed. Disagreement is not, either. If you assert an opinion as if it were a fact (especially an uninformed opinion), or something contrary to facts, then one should expect pushback. "You cannot dictate to others" would be an example of pushback. It's not like only one person is not allowed to dictate to others.

OTOH, "you lack integrity, honesty, decency and are too cowardly to enforce a rather simple rule. Now go f**k yourself" is a string of personal attacks.

 

As I've written before, "This is a place to discuss science, not a self-esteem support group. Civility is required, but this does not extend to walking on eggshells to accommodate fragile egos."

 

 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

But Phi is absolutely correct: being called ignorant is not a personal attack in the context of our rules if it refers to some issue being discussed. Disagreement is not, either. If you assert an opinion as if it were a fact (especially an uninformed opinion), or something contrary to facts, then one should expect pushback. "You cannot dictate to others" would be an example of pushback. It's not like only one person is not allowed to dictate to others.

OTOH, "you lack integrity, honesty, decency and are too cowardly to enforce a rather simple rule. Now go f**k yourself" is a string of personal attacks.

Being able to use reason to discuss various scientific phenomena requires an arena where that reason is respected. True personal attacks show me that the attacker has reached the limits of their reasoning power, and have resorted to lashing out emotionally.

I've been exposed to some fantastic discussions in the time I've been here, and the common vein running through all of them was critical thinking and knowledge winning out over fallacies and ignorance, and members who are eager to practice civility and learn as opposed to just being right.