1 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Promote ideas, protect people
decent arguments. I think I'd be alright with proposals to burn habited places to the ground being discouraged. People can go make their battleplans somewhere else.
I wonder if there's some precedent on the second example. Hoping that maladies happen to someone; taking a passive stance, but not actually making an explicit threat....it's still effectively a curse (i.e. "*may you* fucking choke etc. etc."). I'm not very fond of them regardless; they don't particularly contribute to positive discussion.
But sure, I suppose some clarification on these sort of nitpicky devil-in-the-details sort of situations wouldn't be a bad thing...
Comment by [deleted] at 14/05/2015 at 18:01 UTC
2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
But sure, I suppose some clarification on these sort of nitpicky devil-in-the-details sort of situations wouldn't be a bad thing...
And the admins know that, but they also know this: trolls are gonna troll. If they present a list of 'what not to do', trolls won't do those things: They'll just do *other* things.
By listing the rules, they're showing their cards to people and saying "you can get away with it *if*...". Ask the admins: No one knows the rules better than those who attempt to circumvent them daily.
And an effective curse ("*may you* fucking choke etc etc") is still not a threat. Curses are not threats, not unless we've discovered that magic invocations actually *work*. You not being fond of them is irrelevant: no one promised you'd be fond of everything you read here.