[Jlall]

Say there was a thread on whether you could identify 19 other experts in an indy (you knew who was playing but you weren't sure which was which) based on their bridge.

Say a poster then made a joke about figuring out who was who based on anonymous posts.

Say a poster then said they could recognize a particular poster (mentioned by name) in half a dozen posts or less.

Would you consider this a personal attack?

Would you consider considering this a personal attack to be ludicrous?

Would you consider this post getting DELETED for being a personal attack correct?

[snip]

This post has been edited by inquiry: 2009-November-25, 10:22

[helene_t]

The post about KenRexford is not an attack of course but maybe this poll is an attack on a particular moderator, so I voted Yes.

[Jlall]

helene_t, on Nov 22 2009, 07:07 AM, said:

The post about KenRexford is not an attack of course but maybe this poll is an attack on a particular moderator, so I voted Yes.

It wasn't about kenrexford, it was about someone else. You wouldn't know who since it got deleted I guess.

Yes yes I know MODS HAVE A TOUGH JOB ETC POOR THEM. But how is saying you can recognize someone in half a dozen posts or less a personal attack, especially in that context? GIVE ME A BREAK!

I did not name the moderator by name. I did not name who made the post by name. I did not name who the post was about.

But I am curious if anyone on this forum actually thinks that it was a personal attack. ANYONE?

[Hanoi5]

I voted maybe 'cause it depends on how things are done and to whom and you could be very offensive withouth apparently looking so or without meaning it.

[kenberg]

I think I sort of know what was said and maybe I would rather make up my own question: "Ken, would you have deleted the post?" Given what I saw, NO.

There are some people, for example KenR, Mike, Winston, surely others perhaps including myself, that are often recognizable. Now people may think I am nuts, but I think that they usually understand roughly at least what I am saying. Suppose we have a succession of posts which many people find very confusing simply as to what is being said. If someone says, "I have no idea what you are talking about" this seems fair and i think such comments do not get deleted. If someone says "I don't have to read the signature to know who wrote this" it is somewhat more caustic. Personal attack? Not to my mind. Caustic. Yes, I think so.

Sitting here drinking coffee and communicating with people from all over is a pleasure but the distance creates problems. Sitting around a table things get handled much more efficiently. Caustic remarks get perhaps caustic responses and hopefully everyone has a good laugh. With distance we get to brood.

Anyway, I like to think that I, as a poster, would not get into a snit over it and I, as a moderator, would leave the kids to settle things on their own.

[Jlall]

Hanoi5, on Nov 22 2009, 07:40 AM, said:

I voted maybe 'cause it depends on how things are done and to whom and you could be very offensive withouth apparently looking so or without meaning it.

It happened almost exactly as I said, paraphrase:

"I could recognize [name]'s posts in half a dozen posts or less." I tried to give as much context as possible.

The poster mentioned as the one who could be recognized does not have [snip as leads to discussion of a player by name latter by other people (not justin)... those post mentioning by name have been removed from this thread -- inquiry]

This post has been edited by inquiry: 2009-November-25, 10:25

[Al_U_Card]

Arrrrhhh, the demon rum, methinks, doth rattle it's chains....

Pirate attack?

[luke warm]

i can't see how in the world that would be a personal attack

[helene_t]

I suddenly realized the post must have referred to Al

[hotShot]

Would a musician be insulted, if you say you recognized his play or sound?
Would a designer be insulted, if you say you recognized his design?
Would a poet be insulted, if you say you recognized his style?

The answer to those questions is, that it can be anything from the biggest compliment to an insult, depending on the way it is said and the smile in the speakers face.

In a forum you need to be more clear, because the reader won't have your body language to make the intended interpretation, and in doubt they will assume that any ambiguity is intended.

[kenrexford]

God help us if recognizing someone is a personal attack. One could argue that removing such a post is more insulting than the post itself.

If I saw a post that said, "Kenrexford might argue that X is right," my first reaction, if I agreed, would be to feel honored that someone had analyzed it from my perspective, a sort of compliment. If that post was removed as a personal attack, I would then really wonder how dense I am that I missed such strong sarcasm, for example.

The same type of thing is done all the time. Lots of people post what they think someone else would do. I have seen many guesses at what another person might think. I don't even think that the contrarian guess is bad. "I'd bid 1NT, but I bet Justin bids 2♣" or "I was just thinking that Mike probably would have doubled" or the like. Even if you disagree with a person, caring what they think enough to actually be able to guess somewhat accurately what they might do in a given situation is potentially complimentary.

But, removing the post as a personal attack risks translation of an ambiguous interpretation into a derogatory or sarcastic or mocking one, in the eyes of the beholder.

[Al_U_Card]

helene_t, on Nov 22 2009, 08:21 AM, said:

I suddenly realized the post must have referred to Al

We all have our distinctive styles, thank goodness!

[y66]

Winstonm, on Nov 22 2009, 09:43 AM, said:

Quote

Posted on Nov 22 2009, 06:17 AM

I would mostly wonder what anyone, if sober, was doing up at this time of day worrying about these particular questions.

I saw that thread. Yeah, I also wonder what's so annoying about person A characterizing person B's playful, deserved sarcasm of obtuse comments by person C as a personal attack that person D would bother to post a poll like this one.

Maybe person D is intolerant of obtuseness. If so, I hope he doesn't read this post.

Or maybe he feels that A's actions were ill-judged and unfairly impugned B who is, after all, fairly well known for playful sarcasm and perhaps even well loved for his frequent, brotherly-like (Al-like?) interactions with all forum posters, including C.

Or maybe it's a just free speech thing.

Not trying to start a second poll here.

... but if I were, I'd vote for the unfairness line of reasoning. That's the one that usually gets me.

[MarkDean]

I would be insulted if someone said they could not recognize my posts in half dozen or so: implying they are run of the mill, adding nothing to the discussion.

I would guess I could recognize almost all regular posters within six posts.

[Elianna]

I think that it would depend on what else was said. If it was just "I'd recognize Elianna's posts in 6 or less", what's the problem?

If it said "I'd recognize Elianna's posts in 6 or less because they're usually random and seldom never on topic", that might seem to be looking for a fight, but it's not a PERSONAL attack.

If it said "I'd recognize Elianna's posts in 6 or less because she's an fing idiot and shouldn't be thinking about playing bridge", I'd say that was a personal attack.

As I did not see the post, I cannot comment on which of the three it was. From what you describe, it would fall into the first two examples for me, and I wouldn't report it. And I am a pretty liberal reporter.

eta: I voted no

[babalu1997]

i vote that this thread be removed on the account that it cannot be understood.

this is more cryptic than that string theory stuff

[Jlall]

Elianna, on Nov 22 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

I think that it would depend on what else was said. If it was just "I'd recognize Elianna's posts in 6 or less", what's the problem?

This was almost exactly the post in it's entirety.

BTW this post was NOT by me and was by someone who does not really ever use personal attacks.

[Elianna]

Jlall, on Nov 22 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

Elianna, on Nov 22 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

I think that it would depend on what else was said.  If it was just "I'd recognize Elianna's posts in 6 or less", what's the problem?

This was almost exactly the post in it's entirety.

BTW this post was NOT by me and was by someone who does not really ever use personal attacks.

Then it seems to me to be even more so WTP. Because someone had ALREADY started the topic of I'd recognize so-and-so's posts, so it wasn't out of context.

[Al_U_Card]

How about we start a "Name that poster" game thread.

à la "Name that tune!" show, you get so many guesses to name the mystery poster. Might be fun...

[Phil]

Al_U_Card, on Nov 22 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

How about we start a "Name that poster" game thread.

à la "Name that tune!" show, you get so many guesses to name the mystery poster. Might be fun...

This could be quite funny.

I would suggest during a week in December we all assume aliases and after the week we can try to guess who's who.

I saw the post in question and deleting it is an overreaction.