Please do not...offend... other users

[Zelda]

Wow I don't think I've seen an argument where both sides are this wrong for a while. It shouldn't even be about whether or not someone is offended by being told to shut up, it's an extremely simple case of someone posting off topic in PAPOY, which we all know has pretty strict posting rules. Whether you said "I like floaty butterflies" or "die in a hole you worthless maggot", the post should have been edited. The fact that the mod got the wrong edit just makes the situation more ridiculous

How is the non mod side wrong, noone has said anything about the pointless posting being unfair, cause that was, if anything we were agreeing with your point that Ben gave the wrong edit

[Chippiewill]

Yes it is. If no accidents happen on a road, why would you need to enforce a speed limit on the basis that someone might die even though there's days/months/years of evidence to suggest that it's only a rare - sad all the same but rare too - occurance (if it all). Same principle with offending someone imo.

But people taking offence isn't rare so you do need precautionary measures.

[Zelda]

But people taking offence isn't rare so you do need precautionary measures.

People more likely to take offence if stuff hidden from them though, and if people take offence from niggly little things then they needa get out into the open world more. As i've already said but ill repeat this wonderful quote again -

"I would rather someone was rude to my face then talk about me behind my back"

By hiding stuff from them it might aswell just be talking behind their back and causing more offence then not hiding it from them.

[Zuth]

That's exactly the point? You haven't removed Don's 'offensive' part in the quote.....

Sorry I completely misread your post, I totally forgot as I had 4 posts to deal with, sorting the quotes didnt even cross my mind.

Mind reader you are not, and someone with common sense from what I can tell you are really not.

Why are you banging on about reading minds, it's more or less common sense.

My life ambition is to become a mind reader

[Lee]

Think use should all give Ben a break, he's not done anything wrong. Surely the decision on whether the post is offensive or not lies with the moderator - who was authorised to make those calls when he was accepted onto the team. I'd say that instead of posting a thread for you to publicly appeal the decision, you should send a PM to Scott who will deal with it appropriately.

[Zelda]

Think use should all give Ben a break, he's not done anything wrong. Surely the decision on whether the post is offensive or not lies with the moderator - who was authorised to make those calls when he was accepted onto the team. I'd say that instead of posting a thread for you to publicly appeal the decision, you should send a PM to Scott who will deal with it appropriately.

Surely the one who decides if the post was going to be offensive TO ME happens to be ME. Hence why it should only be removed if I report it or its bleeding obvious that its rude, instead of asking a question, which as Sam said would hardly constitute ruse anyway

[Chippiewill]

Because if you're already offended then removing it isn't going to achieve anything. Pre-emptive removal only makes sense.

[The Don]

Because if you're already offended then removing it isn't going to achieve anything. Pre-emptive removal only makes sense.

It punishes the user who was rude...

[Chippiewill]

It punishes the user who was rude...

I would think that is the goal?

[Zelda]

I would think that is the goal?

It also punishes the person its aimed at though