Abuse of fellow members

[idleidolidyll]

If the moderators moderated consistently according to the 'rules' instead of the erratic, inconsistent and often ignorant way they do now; we would have far fewer problems here.

And before you go getting all upset, I use the word ignorant in its first form: lacking knowledge.

Cases in point abound and I've posted websites here explaining what constitutes a personal attack or a fallacious argument. Sadly, many of those 'in charge' have no idea and impose that ignorance on an ad hoc basis.

I've pulled them up on the hypocrisy of their warnings and reds too many times to excuse their lack of knowledge and bias.

[idleidolidyll]

So lets post it again:

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

yes, I know it's hard; Kiwis are often better at ignorant bullshit than informed discussion.

This is the most abused of course (mind you, i'm sure they've all been used/abused at some time or another):

Argumentum ad Hominem<o></o>

Translation: "Argument against the man", Latin <o></o>
Alias: The Fallacy of Personal Attack <o></o>
Type: Genetic Fallacy (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html) <o></o>
Exposition:<o></o>

A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premiss (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Premiss)es about his opponent. Such red herring (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redherrf.html)s may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate. <o></o>
Exposure:<o></o>

Ad Hominem is the most familiar of informal fallacies (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/inforfal.html), and—with the possible exception of Undistributed Middle (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/undismid.html)—the most familiar logical fallacy (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/logifall.html) of them all. It is also one of the most used and abused of fallacies, and both justified and unjustified accusations of Ad Hominem abound in any debate. <o></o>
The phrase "ad hominem argument (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Argument)" is sometimes used to refer to a very different type of argument, namely, one that uses premisses accepted by the opposition to argue for a position. In other words, if you are trying to convince someone of something, using premisses that the person accepts—whether or not you believe them yourself. This is not necessarily a fallacious (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Fallacious) argument, and is often rhetorically effective. <o></o>
Subfallacies (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Subfallacy):<o></o>



Abusive: An Abusive Ad Hominem occurs when an attack on the character or other irrelevant personal qualities of the opposition—such as appearance—is offered as evidence against her position. Such attacks are often effective distractions ("red herrings"), because the opponent feels it necessary to defend herself, thus being distracted from the topic of the debate. <o></o>
Circumstantial: A Circumstantial Ad Hominem is one in which some irrelevant personal circumstance surrounding the opponent is offered as evidence against the opponent's position. This fallacy is often introduced by phrases such as: "Of course, that's what you'd expect him to say." The fallacy claims that the only reason why he argues as he does is because of personal circumstances, such as standing to gain from the argument's acceptance. <o></o>

This form of the fallacy needs to be distinguished from criticisms directed at testimony, which are not fallacious, since pointing out that someone stands to gain from testifying a certain way would tend to cast doubt upon that testimony. For instance, when a celebrity endorses a product, it is usually in return for money, which lowers the evidentiary value of such an endorsement—often to nothing! In contrast, the fact that an arguer may gain in some way from an argument's acceptance does not affect the evidentiary value of the argument, for arguments can and do stand or fall on their own merits.<o></o>



Poisoning the Well (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/poiswell.html) <o></o>
Tu Quoque (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/tuquoque.html)<o></o>

Source:<o></o>

S. Morris Engel, <cite>With Good Reason: An Introduction to Informal Fallacies (Fifth Edition)</cite> (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312157584/thefallacyfil-20) (St. Martin's, 1994), pp. 198-206.



Your fallacy of course is to infer that because I offered the reference, it is somehow not authoritative.
Can you tell me the name of the fallacy you've committed?

No? Neither can most of the 'moderators', and that's the whole point.


<o></o>
<o>
</o>

[rottiguy]

Does stalking and harrassment count as abuse? How far can one poster go on a crusade before he is stopped?

[chanceyy]

Just try giving them shit back and see how they like a taste of that, if they start insulting or out and out calling you derogatory names, pm a moddie and they should give them a slapping :spanking:

Instead of giving them shit back .. just use the ignore button .. & if its a major problem pm a mod & do not retaliate that just makes it tit for tat.


remember this is the internet & ppl love to hide behind a screen

[idleidolidyll]

Actually this is the website I prefer for identification of fallacies.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

I used it extensively in a study of internet debate I did for my degree a few years ago.

Others might prefer Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I don't, wiki's setup is too open to corruption and it's not entirely trustworthy as a source for anything important.

Whichever website you like though, if you read through you'll have a far better understanding of why many arguments you see here seem so 'ignorant'.

Basically the rule of thumb is "If it feels irrelevant, ignorant or abusive, it's probably a fallacy" and you would do well to head to one of the sites on offer to identify it.

Use of fallacy is usually the province of the loser in an argument. They have nothing left that can be deemed logical or relevant so they fall back on fallacy. Of course many don't even know they are doing so, foggy thinking abounds.

[idleidolidyll]

Just try giving them shit back and see how they like a taste of that, if they start insulting or out and out calling you derogatory names, pm a moddie and they should give them a slapping :spanking:

that has rarely worked for me

[Mom]

Just try giving them shit back and see how they like a taste of that, if they start insulting or out and out calling you derogatory names, pm a moddie and they should give them a slapping :spanking:

Dont give them shit back, it is inflamatory and can esculate an issue, subtle teasing is not reccommended either FWIW. Some people have zero sense of humour sometimes (including me).


Instead of giving them shit back .. just use the ignore button .. & if its a major problem pm a mod & do not retaliate that just makes it tit for tat. remember this is the internet & ppl love to hide behind a screen

Personal stuff is really hard to ignore to be fair. I am stirrer sometimes, I own it. I am also a complete defender of my position.

Seriously how can you complain about serial red repper when the comments are not abusive? How to complain about a post that is innocent but comes at the end of a string of inflamatory replys?

You Mods can keep your jobs! you are :buggerd: if you do and :girlfight: if you dont. Or the other way round????

[chanceyy]

The problem is the "perceived" personal attack, the written word can be hard to decipher into the intent in which its delivered, and most ppl take personal exception to it so feel the need to defend themselves and usually in a most public way.

For those who feel that someone is personally attacking them, or using the rep system for abuse then do not retaliate & pm one of the snr mods who can investigate this for you.

How easy is it to mod when it becomes tit for tat & two parties become abusive to each other via pm or the rep system or in the threads, until one party starts crying to the mods to do something about it ..you both interact & become as bad as each other so both deserve to be infracted ..

simple solution use the ignore function .. thats wot its there for .. :2thumbsup

[idleidolidyll]

nope, even the worst members sometimes have something worth reading

i don't have anyone on ignore

[Nasty]

I have been told to do the following:


This didn't turn out too good.

I used to run a Vbulletin forum but never had this come up (it wasn't a very active forum haha). My solution is that you just allow your contacts and site staff to post on your visitor messages page, thus if a non contact wishes to talk to you, they can always use the PM service.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/profile.php?do=editoptions

Tick the box.

great call and info to StClingin :niceone:

[scumdog]

T
How easy is it to mod when it becomes tit for tat & two parties become abusive to each other via pm or the rep system or in the threads, until one party starts crying to the mods to do something about it ..you both interact & become as bad as each other so both deserve to be infracted ..

simple solution use the ignore function .. thats wot its there for .. :2thumbsup

The above sounds like a day at work for me...I have to mediate to often for those whose immaturity prevents them from sorting their problems themselves - regardless of age or gender.

[1 Free Man]

Got mail from Cajun yesterday and I guess I'm in a sin bin of some sort.
I have to admit being called a brown shirted jew burner kinda pushed me over the edge a little but I did show a great deal of constraint. I would have liked to unleash the venom of my tounge on the perpertrator of this racist slur on me but chose to be a better person than him.
You gotta do what you gotta do.
Can I get a reduced sentence for good behaviour?? real crims can

[FJRider]

nope, even the worst members sometimes have something worth reading

i don't have anyone on ignore

I totally agree...neither do I... and I can read ALL they post about me :niceone: Only one red rep from a nasty person, for posting a silly post :mad: And no red rep's from those that probably had cause to :clap:

[chanceyy]

The above sounds like a day at work for me...I have to mediate to often for those whose immaturity prevents them from sorting their problems themselves - regardless of age or gender.

yup I can well imagine .. ohh well its a typical day on KB ..

[idleidolidyll]

Here's a nice example of the hypocrisy of the moderators:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1676422#post1676422

Look at the bottom of the page where one or more pathetic losers have made direct personal attacks through the tags function.
The hypocrisy is that the moderators leave that there while sending much less abusive stuff to the sin bin.

Why is KB fucked up? There's your answer.

[Jantar]

Here's a nice example of the hypocrisy of the moderators:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1676422#post1676422

Look at the bottom of the page where one or more pathetic losers have made direct personal attacks through the tags function.
The hypocrisy is that the moderators leave that there while sending much less abusive stuff to the sin bin.

Why is KB fucked up? There's your answer.

What hypocrisy? Moderators cannot be expected to read every little piece of every thread, so unless these things are reported then they cannot be dealt with. All tags have been removed from that thread this time, but in future report them. Mods are not mind readers.

[NighthawkNZ]

What hypocrisy? Moderators cannot be expected to read every little piece of every thread, so unless these things are reported then they cannot be dealt with. All tags have been removed from that thread this time, but in future report them. Mods are not mind readers.

I removed the tags... as you said I didn't see them till they were pointed out...

[James Deuce]

It's alright for you to abuse people though, isn't it?

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1676075&postcount=236

[Virago]

Senior members can edit tags themselves, on threads they have started.

[idleidolidyll]

What hypocrisy? Moderators cannot be expected to read every little piece of every thread, so unless these things are reported then they cannot be dealt with. All tags have been removed from that thread this time, but in future report them. Mods are not mind readers.

oh sure

you stick to your story, it even sounds almost plausible

the number of times some dick has whined about a post of mine and the mod hasn't read back beyond one post to find the cause is mind boggling

[idleidolidyll]

It's alright for you to abuse people though, isn't it?

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1676075&postcount=236

what abuse?

he called me a socialist because of my posts supporting socialism.

and if you read that post again you'll see i attack his argument not his person

I called him a fascist because of his posts supporting fascism (and strangely, a mod sent my post to the sin bin for merely identifying the fascism in his post)

fairness from mods? i never expect it

tell me where the abuse is

[James Deuce]

For a Communications student you're a little bit deluded about what constitutes written abuse and what doesn't.

If that is what you see as rebutting an argument, then I shall refer you to this gem so you can freshen your comprehension in regard to the definition and execution of an argument.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/k3HaRFBSq9k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/k3HaRFBSq9k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

It may be a hoary old chestnut, but it is an effective reminder of how to engage the intellect rather than shouting at people to "make" your point.

Generally speaking referring to people using a diminutive of their name also constitutes subtle but definite abuse but you lack the balls to do that in public so you fall to the old standard of relying on the "rep" system to convey your contempt.

[idleidolidyll]

For a Communications student you're a little bit deluded about what constitutes written abuse and what doesn't.

and in posting that you still manage to avoid pointing out why it might be abuse.
that is of course because it was a genuine attack on his argument not on his person.

If that is what you see as rebutting an argument, then I shall refer you to this gem so you can freshen your comprehension in regard to the definition and execution of an argument.

yawn embed removed., shall i post one of my assignments on the subject? have you got a few hours spare?

It may be a hoary old chestnut, but it is an effective reminder of how to engage the intellect rather than shouting at people to "make" your point.

why should i try to 'engage the intellect' of someone when they are obviously obtuse? did they try to engage the intellect or just post mindless propaganda? no, better to completely destroy their stupid argument and leave it at that.

Generally speaking referring to people using a diminutive of their name also constitutes subtle but definite abuse but you lack the balls to do that in public so you fall to the old standard of relying on the "rep" system to convey your contempt.

good grief that's nonsense!
i rarely use rep at all and mainly only for positive posts.
as for "lack the balls to do that in public" how the fuck would you know what i do in public? If you knew me and had spoken to my friends you'd know that i am rarely afraid to say anything in public.

those who have been red repped by me are few and far between and were so repped for one of 2 reasons:

because they red repped me when they ran out of argument or because their post was genuinely rubbish

now isn't it strange that your post wailing about what you think is abuse contains so much abuse?

what's that greek word again? hypo......

[Storm]

Hypo let it go?
Hypo-know when to hold em, know when to fold them?

By your own admission,-from what I've seen-, a few people dont like you, and aren't willing to listen to anything you have to say, be it right or wrong.
Whatever else you are, you're not stupid, so if you choose to keep banging your head on those particular brick walls, you have no one but yourself to blame for the resultant headaches.

PS.Moaning and bitching -even to the Mods- isnt going to cure them either.