Mutant1988 said:
Calling in question someone's reading ability when they purposefully post solely to spite while seemingly ignoring what's written is not an insult - It's an observation.
Posting that it reflects poorly on a person to express glee over the moderation of another user is not an insult either - It's also an observation.
It's in the way you phrase things. Observations and insults aren't mutually exclusive things.
I've never used the justification "They started it", but I'm referencing the principle as a reason for why this one-sided moderation is especially aggravating. Especially when, given the formulation of the rules, what they wrote could easily be interpreted as solely made to incite inappropriate replies.
Which really, if they use the reasoning that I'm not allowed to if they did it first, why then am I the only one being penalized? Isn't the implication of that statement that there's two wrongs ("- does not make a right")? Apparently not.
Again, if you have problems with the way moderation is handled, you are free to report your complaints to the higher-ups, in particular the Community Manager @ffronw
The moderators are just people, there aren't a great many of them at the moment, and they have a large number of posts to go through on a daily basis. They're going to make mistakes, they're going to miss things, and they're occasionally going to clear things that can be construed as breaking the rules. Alternatively, things that may seem like they break the rules to you or me might technically get through a loophole in the way the Code of Conduct is enforced; I know that I personally have had many problems with certain posts in the past that were technically deemed as not breaking any rules.
I don't know what is considered a violation of the rules at any given time, because there doesn't seem to be any consistency and the rules allow the moderators to moderate almost anything, at will.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but even as someone who is not on the moderation team I can assure that that is not and has never been the case.
Seriously. Calling a group by an insulting name - A-okay (Apparently, seeing how that one post I'm referring to is still not moderated). Calling a user by the same name - Nope. Even though the group could easily apply just as well to ANY user. And the Code of Conduct even accounts for that!
Yes, there are loopholes. I believe that is something the current CM has been working to remedy, but they are not having an easy time of it.
Don't say anything, ever, that could ever be considered offensive. Not even with an explanation or employment of the same insulting logic as the user you reply to. Again, not saying that two wrongs makes a right - But a demonstration of error can make a user reconsider how he acts. i.e, don't call people a moron while acting like one. Which he did, by my definition and with the reasoning to draw that conclusion stated.
Again, it's in the way you phrase things. You can call out someone's error without directly saying they're stupid, or insinuating that they have an awful personality because of "self-congratulatory spitefulness".
Of course, my error was to not write it as "I think you're the one acting moronic in doing etc, because etc". It's not okay to call someone a racist. But it is okay to say that what they say (By extension, do) is racist, with stated reasons. Which is different somehow?
Honestly, I can't really comment on that particular loophole. I've voiced my own displeasure with it to people on the moderation team in the past. But the proper answer in that situation would just be to reword your post entirely until you're not calling the other person a moron or passive-aggressively insinuating that all they're trying to do is rile you up. If people are actively trying to work you up, the worst response you can give them is to actually get worked up.
In your opinion, does what I write in those post cross a line?
That's not really my place to say.
If you want my complete honesty, then I'm unsure whether I consider those posts to be directly breaking the rules, but there's also the issue of context. You admitted that you were getting angry in the thread and that people who were acting condescending or belittling could expect to receive the same. That gives the implication that you don't care about breaking the rules. In addition, the posts you were warned for most certainly contained "combative, aggressive, or demeaning language" and while I'd really rather not get into a circular discussion about why other people didn't get moderated when you did, the simple fact remains that none of us normal users are entitled to have free reign testing the rules. While the closing comment of your thread may have been worded poorly itself, as the OP of a thread if you cannot remain civil in the conversation throughout then the moderators or staff are well within their power to shut your thread down. You're not the first person who has received multiple warnings at once and had a thread shut down because it spiraled out of control.
The fact that I need to be careful is not really a positive quality of the forum. I'd much rather have less ambiguous rules and consistent enforcement of them. The fact that I can be suspended for any error at this point does not make me feel super duper.
You're not supposed to "feel super duper". If it makes you feel any better, the moderators don't particularly enjoy needing to hand out warnings either. On this, I agree and disagree with you, because the current primary problem is one of the Code of Conduct not reflecting how the rules are being enforced anymore. It's something that is being worked on, but is going to provide many problems for the userbase of this website until it can be cleared up. However, I personally believe that everyone should be careful anyway. Passive-aggressiveness aside, the thing that made this forum stand out to me when I joined and throughout the years I've been here has been the fact that people couldn't just make flyby posts and run off.
Consistency is never going to be uniform across the website. Even going back to 2008 or earlier, you can occasionally find threads that have low content posts which were never moderated. The moderators rely on users to report posts, and even within the confines of the rules certain moderators are going to interpret certain posts slightly differently. If you're unsure whether a post you want to make will break the rules or not, the best course of action is to either not make the post or try to reword it.