Hang on a minute,while we can not talk about the recent events I called for the deletion of an infamous couple of posts.
This site is better for its removal, hopefully few saw those posts.
TPP you would agree if you saw them right or wrong character assassination is surely unwanted.
Flaming, my view having been charged with it, wrongly, is deliberate insulting or belittling another.
May be we could return to a once used *car Park* a thread taking it out side in the car park to resolve issues between groups or individuals.
I agree we need intervention at times, no poster I know here aware of the full story would not have taken the actions GY did.

Cornflower,

One should be mindful that our esteemed moderator gave the okay for this thread to proceed - which shows that he thinks we can be trusted not to abuse the privilege.

Re: flaming. I believe it is a particularly flammable offence to target the author of an article - as opposed to the sentiments expressed there in. (especially if the author has a suggestive surname that invites one to have a bit of fun with it).

As for the word "idiot", which for some reason, flows more easily off the fingertips and into infamy even more readily that its superb cousin "imbecile", it is the linguistic equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife - always at the ready, but one must be judicious in its deployment.

Pied Piper "but then we have to set some kind of toughness bar to begin with"

And that's the difficult bit. It definitely has to be at a level that accepts that idea's will be challenged or sometimes totally dismantled.

The part I struggle with is comes when it comes to reflecting on a posters online behavior. Is it Ok to point out that someone is less than fastidious with the truth? What about some mocking when an idea really invites it? Reminders of past posts when a poster appears to be misrepresenting them self?

Re authors, I'm with Holly when it come's to pieces by MTR. In her case it does seem to be a bit of live by the sword etc. Again though I'd rather see the holes in her arguments highlighted than see a lot of name calling.

R0bert

TPP it was not George but an inference about an author of a particular subject - it is not important whom, I should not have made the inference in the first place. I agree with George.

Cornflower not everyone is a seasoned Net user and in fact OLO is my only forum other than a brief flirtation with New Matilda and an organic gardening site. Flaming is not something I have heard of prior to seeing the word written on OLO and I thought it was something to do with stirring the pot - which in a way I guess it is.

Insults can come in words more obvious than 'idiot' when discussing gender issues and I have yet to see anyone using the term feminazi be reprimanded for example. I think I would rather be called an idiot if one had a choice.

Fact is, OLO is not a playground for kids but hopefully one for grown ups.

ID/iot...or my..id=iot...i dont think of it as a bad-word
only bad-form...

i feel..those..who decend into name-calling..only reveal...*them-selves*...isnt it easier..to simply ignore idiots..than to try to correct their ignorance..?

idiot basiclly means...A foolish or stupid person.

..A person of profound mental/retardation..having a mental age below three years..and generally being unable to learn connected speech..or guard against common dangers.

[if the biggest danger
is going to the sin-bin...well who the real idiot?]

The term belongs..to a classification system
no longer in use and..is now considered offensive...

the intelect..of a 3 year-old
boy..that really reveals ignorance...
[BUT..a just reason..for upset?

only logical..to an imbisile..!]
imbisile..[noun]..meaning
1...A stupid or silly person;..a dolt.
2...A person..whose mental acumen..is well below par.

3. A person of moderate..to severe mental retardation..having a mental age..of from three to seven years..and generally being capable of some degree of communication..and performance of simple tasks under supervision.

The term belongs to a classification system..
no longer in use and..is now considered offensive.
..[to dolts..or idiots..or imbisiles..
who cannot get...*its intended *meaning..is self revelatory]

but enough..of this talk..of retarded..individuality...
in lue of...*on topic*..response

flaming...to me...is an incitement..to respond..[in a worse manner..than the manner of him[her]..who initiated..the flame

[ie the fuel*provider..]
even if innocently providing..the fuel...for a possable flame

not the bright spark...
striking blindly..at a fool..[imbisile]...; or..lunatick..or idiot...
intitialising..an idiots response..[rep-lie]

anyhow...i have confused myself..in reply
and long for the good ol days...[if thats not off-topic]

its good to see the old faces...id's...and id=iota

i wish for the day..that..we can write without self censure
[its said only the truth can set us free]

guess you can tell..i was never..a prefect..or..a hall-monitor
and got lost somewhere between grade two and three

and..english lit...is only the active..
for a re-noun..[best use of..some shaksperian/flame
revealing its best-de/light...as its ashes..returning..to the dust]

sorry...im trying too*..hard
to walk with both-feet..on opposing sides
of the barbed-wire fence...while remaining generalising

thank god...i dont make the rules
and dont..have to agonise..over enforcing...them,..[or not]

I reckon the moderators here do an awesome and possibly thankless job...

Funny, I used to participate in a car-enthusiast forum where the moderators became a bit of a "clicky" group high on their own authority. I ended up chipping one of those clowns for hammering a poster in a personal and nasty way because the poster wanted to sell car parts without photographs (contrary to site policy). The moderator made the statement "Surely you cannot be such a complete idiot..." in his nasty tirade, and when I chipped him he played the semantic "CANNOT be" as actually not calling the unwitting guy an idiot. Eventually there was a whole thread about the moderators attitude, dunno how it ended because I said my bit and never went back.

It would be nice to think we dont really need so many obvious rules like attack the idea not the man, personally I am a sarcastic person that hates my sarcastic comments taken literally and used as ammunition against me. But thats something I'll have to keep in mind.