[glen]

here we go again, personal attacks on BBO forums

why not delete posts with personal attacks?

why condone online bullying?

[inquiry]

Kindly click the "report button" on any post where you see a personal attack.

As you know (from your post) these are not allowed in theory. Unfortunately, now that the forum has grown, I don't read every single post, and I am sure Barry doesn't either. We either edit or delete post with personal attacks. There are a few minor exceptions. If the attack occurred several "post" ago, and a buncho people have responded to it in a positive way (and quoted it) such that the attacker has learned his lesson and maybe even apologized, we might leave it alone. In the water cooler, personal attacks in an "exchange" are sometimes left alone (I do not as a rule mess with or read water cooler, as I was against a non-bridge forum in the first place, but its popularity has proven my view wrong). The clever people attack someones idea for being "Stupid" (put in whatever personal attack you want for stupid) and that slips by. The minute they call the poster him or herself stupid, that is violation of the TOS for the website..


But anyway, reporting it is as so easy... click the report button (yellow button on the lower left hand side of every forum post) and it will be flagged so that rain, barmar and I can see that it has been reported. We can't miss a reported post because the system displays it to us when we log in to the forum plus the software sends us an email telling us that it has been reported with links to the reported post right in the email. If someone will report it, you can rest assured that at least three moderators will know about it. '

[Vampyr]

What happens when the TOS are violated? When I once reported a particularly venomous personal attack, there seemed to be no repercussions -- certainly not a ban.

[aguahombre]

I believe Glen is referring to a very recent thread in particular, and to the bashing of a particular poster. When attacks of ideas cross the line and turn into personal attacks, I cringe. But, I also understand where posters not normally abusive are coming from even if I don't particularly like what they are doing.

Remember Cayuga? When someone asks questions but really has his own answers, or otherwise trolls his own/someone else's threads, he/she is provoking such attacks...true, we don't have to take the bait. We can instead make our point one time, then back off the continuations.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-27, 12:31, said:

I believe Glen is referring to a very recent thread in particular, and to the bashing of a particular poster. When attacks of ideas cross the line and turn into personal attacks, I cringe. But, I also understand where posters not normally abusive are coming from even if I don't particularly like what they are doing.

Remember Cayuga? When someone asks questions but really has his own answers, or otherwise trolls his own/someone else's threads, he/she is provoking such attacks...true, we don't have to take the bait. We can instead make our point one time, then back off the continuations.

Yea i agree with you.

"Attacking a known spammer/troller/provoker. Does it worth it ?"

Probably not


Imo the OP is right in principle. The excuses for some of the attacks people do (including myself) are almost as nonsense as the topics created by the provoker.

-If you are one of the first repliers each time when a particular person posts
-If you know he has a convention book that he opens every morning before he even drinks his coffee and creates a topic.
-If you know from your previous experiences that his questions are not actually questions but an attempt to give lectures.
-If you know it is almost impossible to prove someone wrong in bidding related topics as you can in a play or defense problem. Especially if you do not give much credit to his knowledge and skills about this game (regardless of you are right or wrong with this conclusion)

And if you are still replying to his topics as one of the first or early repliers, or just replying, i don't think you have too much of an excuse to accuse him of making no sense topics or accuse him of giving lectures after himself asked the question or his level or his intentions. Basically if you are still replying to his posts, you can not complain about him getting on your nerves.. (The word "you" i used was not meant to point Aguaman by any means, for the record )

[nige1]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-27, 11:27, said:

What happens when the TOS are violated? When I once reported a particularly venomous personal attack, there seemed to be no repercussions -- certainly not a ban.

There were repercussions -- the alleged offender was nominated for a BBO posty award.

This post has been edited by nige1: 2013-July-28, 19:00

[aguahombre]

Timo: I am in-fact an early responder to some of the posts, even knowing the OP's proven agendas; so, you accurately descibed me in that scenario. The subject matter of the thread itself(as begun) is often worthwhile. I notice that some quite prominent regular contributors will get in early with valuable insights, and then back off not to be heard from again in the same thread. It is the back-and-forth which follows that leads to flame wars.

[Trinidad]

In the bridge laws, the titles are not part of the laws. It is well possible that this is also the case for the Terms of Service for the discussion forum. I haven't read these ToS lately, but let's keep in mind that we are dealing with a discussion forum.

In my view, discussion means that you exchange ideas, are willing to listen, learn and adjust your point of view and respect the opinions of others, consider them seriously, even if you don't agree with them. This doesnot mean that you have to "roll over" at the first opposing view, and you are certainly allowed to introduce new arguments to the discussion. But to have a meaningful discussion, you need to be able to tell the difference between facts and opinions, particularly between facts and your own opinions.

It is also perfectly fine to be provocative from time to time or to play the devil's advocate now and then. However, being provocative should be a means, not an end. And, if you provoke, you should be willing to accept the response to your provocations.

In the case that, without a doubt in my mind, led to this thread, we have an OP whose posts at best:

• are factually untrue
  
• seem to provoke as an end, not a means
  
• are accusing others
  
• ignore several basic rules for discussions: The OP is routinely stating the his opinions as facts and he is comparing apples to oranges, e.g. when dealing with statistics or referring to the supposed views of world class players
  
• are clearly not meant to encourage an exchange of ideas or a willingness to learn

At the start of these threads (and in several other threads started by this forum member) several experienced posters refute the misinformation presented in the OP of those threads. I cannot speak for the reason why others do that, but I do it -from time to time- because I don't want new, aspiring players to take this misinformation to be the truth. When the thread has developed far enough that a somewhat intelligent new, aspiring player can figure out what is true and what is misinformation, I am usually out of the discussion.

I think that the originator of these threads is either particularly poor at discussing (as well as being poor at bridge) or a destructive troll. Since I generally believe in the good intentions of people, I am (perhaps somewhat naively) assuming the former, but either way I don't view this person as an asset to the forums. This, of course, does not justify personal attacks, but, as aguahombre already pointed out, it makes them somewhat understandable.

Rik

[nige1]

Trinidad, on 2013-July-27, 18:23, said:

I think that the originator of these threads is either particularly poor at discussing (as well as being poor at bridge) or a destructive troll. Since I generally believe in the good intentions of people, I am (perhaps somewhat naively) assuming the former, but either way I don't view this person as an asset to the forums. This, of course, does not justify personal attacks, but, as aguahombre already pointed out, it makes them somewhat understandable.

Trinidad, by your own criterion, is your post is justifiable?

[aguahombre]

nige1, on 2013-July-27, 19:28, said:

Trinidad, by your own criterion, is your post is justifiable?

I think he described what he wrote as understandable, if not justifiable.

[the hog]

When someone asks a question and then pooh poohs all the answers apart from his own, that person deserves all he gets.

[Vampyr]

the hog, on 2013-July-27, 20:41, said:

When someone asks a question and then pooh poohs all the answers apart from his own, that person deserves all he gets.

Well, as some posters above have suggested, participating in the threads minimally or not at all is the mature answer. Don't open the threads and you won't be annoyed.

[the hog]

You must admit, Vampyr, it is amusing to read comments which are expressed with evident gravitas and yet make absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[Vampyr]

the hog, on 2013-July-27, 20:59, said:

You must admit, Vampyr, it is amusing to read comments which are expressed with evident gravitas and yet make absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Then read for amusement and don't be tempted!

[aguahombre]

Oscar Wilde, I believe...like us, could resist everything but temptation.

[32519]

So just because I'm challenging the logic behind someone's favourite convention(s) I'm provoking them. If that's all it takes to raise your ire, how do you stand up in a real discussion?

Everyone has their full right to be wrong. Some are just more wrong than others more often.

[32519]

What happened to Lurpua? Why was she kicked out of the forums?

[32519]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-27, 11:27, said:

What happens when the TOS are violated? When I once reported a particularly venomous personal attack, there seemed to be no repercussions -- certainly not a ban.

If you don't know what this is about, click here. Nice question Stephanie. I hope you get a proper answer.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-27, 21:18, said:

Oscar Wilde, I believe...like us, could resist everything but temptation.

Well, just remember that you can say "that comment is brain dead"; you just can't say "YOU are brain dead".

[32519]

Fred Gitelman:
On behalf of Lurpoa I am requesting you to have her membership to the forum's restored. To have someone excluded because of a few ♥ symbols in their posts is ridiculous. Yet others using vulgar language are permitted to retain their membership in direct contravention of BBO Terms of Service.

The two posts below were copied off Lurpoa's profile. Please step up to the plate, Fred!

Lurpoa Please write Fred and Uday to ask they restore my membership. Be the Heart with You. The Aces banned me because I like Hearts !
2013-Mar-27, 11:49
Lurpoa Inquiry and barmar have excluded me from this forum because of my use of Hearts.
2013-Jan-18, 16:07