Warned for "Jesus"

[Sasaki Kojiro]

This is a textbook example of how not to appeal a warning.

Not really. He justs wants to vent. Could be a textbook example of venting :)

[Beskar]

I agree with the mod on this one. Not because I am Christian, but for the same reason I would say it if you used Muhammed as a swear word. You know it can offend people, so you should not do it when you can get your meaning across just as well using a different word.

Oh my, with pevergreens example for covering up the f-word, it is the whole Danish cartoon situation again.

edit: Stolen from Gameroom, but live your life sin-free.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...77&postcount=2

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I honestly never realized that Ludens wasn't a native speaker of English. His written English is better than mine at any rate.

[pevergreen]

I honestly never realized that Ludens wasn't a native speaker of English. His written English is better than mine at any rate.

Likewise. I also believe he would speak it better than myself.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Wait, whaaa?? What nationality is Ludens?

Anyone?

I had to move up my question, since this is now the second page... And yes, others noted, I never realised Ludens was not a native speaker. I mean, his style of writing seemed to indicate inborn fluency. Non-native speakers usually write better, but it is noticeable in the syntax as well as other factors which country they come from.

[pevergreen]

Not all of us use 30 posts per page.

*basks in the glorious radience that is 80 posts per page.*

[A Very Super Market]

Sweet. High five.

Mafia threads run on for way too long though....

[Jolt]

Indeed, I agree with lobf. Recieving a warning for saying Jesus is nothing short of ridiculous. I too would be completely pissed off were I in lobf's shoes. What if I'm an hellenist and someone says "By Zeus!" should they get a warning as well? What about if I was a Buddhist, people wouldn't be allowed to exclaim "Buddha!"?

I was aware that this wasn't a democracy but to go as far as warning a person for using a name, that seems a little Theocrat-leaning.

My 2 cents.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Not all of us use 30 posts per page.

*basks in the glorious radience that is 80 posts per page.*

Thirty is the default . Most people keep it, even if they are aware of the possibility to change it.


So, the question remains, what nationality is Ludens?

Indeed, I agree with lobf. Recieving a warning for saying Jesus is nothing short of ridiculous. I too would be completely pissed off were I in lobf's shoes. What if I'm an hellenist and someone says "By Zeus!" should they get a warning as well? What about if I was a Buddhist, people wouldn't be allowed to exclaim "Buddha!"?

I was aware that this wasn't a democracy but to go as far as warning a person for using a name, that seems a little Theocrat-leaning.

Hmmm, when looking it from this viewpoint, the infraction is indeed utterly preposterous. Christian bias it is, and Ludens does not have to be Christian to assert such bias. We live in a culture shaped by Christianity and holdovers remain aplenty. I bet a dollar for doughnut Ludens would have not given an infraction for "by Allah!" or "by Brahma!"

(since Buddha is not at all a deity in the vast majority of the forms of Buddhism and since "by Zeus!" was not considered blasphemy in the Antiquity, I had to choose better examples to illustrate the point ).

However, yes, lobf could have been more polite about it... And anyway, I thought the infraction was for mainly the perceived "cut-off" , or uncouth nature of lobf's remark to Fluvius and not because of the Jesus reference...

[bovi]

Noone has any right to ask Ludens his nationality or any other personal information which is not volunteered.

For the record, I do not think the original thing warrants a warning. I think I may have used the same or similar signs of exasperation multiple times myself, but will try to avoid this in the future.

[Prince Cobra]

Hmmm, when looking it from this viewpoint, the infraction is indeed utterly preposterous.

From another viewpoint, it can be even a violation of the Ten Commandments and considered to be offensive. Cursing is tricky and it will not be a bad thing to avoid it. This is a good example. Once again, religious issues are delicate topics.

Lobf made his point clear and it'd be good if he listens to the Ludens' advice and speaks with Tosa about his infraction points. And perhaps to consider changing his title beneath his user name. No offense but I find it to be slightly preposterous (though he is annoyed).

[Banquo's Ghost]

I think it would be worth noting that lobf was issued with a warning PM, not an infraction point.

This carries no penalty, merely recording the post and moderator's note.

These used to be called Alerts, which despite the gentler name, also tended to cause those so inclined to over-react.

It's a formal PM, that's all. When you get a warning, or even a infraction point (which does have consequences) with which you disagree, the best start is to PM the moderator. You're much more likely to get a misunderstanding over-turned.

Also, members should note the context in which a warning/infraction is given. The one word or post of itself may seem within the rules, but may be indicative of an aggressive tone throughout a thread, which, taken as a whole, the moderator feels is disrespectful or otherwise unwelcome.

A warning PM would be entirely sensible in these circumstances, because they certainly get read.

[CountArach]

God, this thread is funny

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[pevergreen]

God, this thread is funny

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Back to your assignments!

So it was just a warning, no WP's.

Then whats the big deal.

[Beskar]

Back to your assignments!

So it was just a warning, no WP's.

Then whats the big deal.

I think it was just a case of Whine-One-One.

In the gameroom, religious references are just edited out if used out of context, because in a way, it is classed as swearing. I sympathise more with the moderator who seemed clearly helpful and understanding.

[Andres]

No they understand "Jesus." That's the problem. The issue is not understanding the context in which it was used. It's extremely common to preface a sentence with "Jesus" "Christ" or "Jesus Christ" when expressing exasperation and/or disbelief. Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it profanity.

In fact, the only way it could be profanity is if you happen to follow a particular set of personal beliefs, and I really can't be found responsible for that.

And how am I even close to "smearing" Christians, non-Americans, or non-native English speakers? Ignorance is a smear now?

I can see where Ludens is coming from. Keep in mind this is an international forum. Some people may take offence. You have to take into account sensitivities of other people when posting at the Org.

You may have noticed that Ludens already posted in this thread, admitted that he himself is not sure and already asked Tosa's opinion on the matter.

Moderators and admins are volunteers, we are not available 24/7, so please, be patient.

Tosa probably hasn't been online since Ludens request.

I wasn't "swearing." I would be perfectly comfortable saying "Jesus" around an 8 year old. You guys are effin nuts.

Calling your fellow Org members "nuts" is a personal attack and not appropriate, btw.

So, the question remains, what nationality is Ludens?

Privacy...

[Jolt]

Thirty is the default . Most people keep it, even if they are aware of the possibility to change it.


So, the question remains, what nationality is Ludens?


Hmmm, when looking it from this viewpoint, the infraction is indeed utterly preposterous. Christian bias it is, and Ludens does not have to be Christian to assert such bias. We live in a culture shaped by Christianity and holdovers remain aplenty. I bet a dollar for doughnut Ludens would have not given an infraction for "by Allah!" or "by Brahma!"

(since Buddha is not at all a deity in the vast majority of the forms of Buddhism and since "by Zeus!" was not considered blasphemy in the Antiquity, I had to choose better examples to illustrate the point ).

However, yes, lobf could have been more polite about it... And anyway, I thought the infraction was for mainly the perceived "cut-off" , or uncouth nature of lobf's remark to Fluvius and not because of the Jesus reference...

First, Portugal is a Catholic country, and even in my country, devout Christians use "Jesus!" as an exclamation work.
The point behind going into "religious" insults is why should some beliefs take precedence over others? As you well pointed out, if he had said "By Brahma" or something of the sort, nobody would have been warned? If I belonged to a sect where people worship my divinity (Which already exists btw) where while I'm Jolt, only I am allowed to be called Jolt by myself, other people most call me "Most Enlightened Being", and anything less than that would make me profoundly offended, would those people calling me Jolt or something else be issued warning points?

Unless its clearly a discriminatory attack on one religion, I hardly see how one can recieve warnings from something religious-related that isn't either scandalous and can't be manipulated to prevent people from saying basically anything.

[caravel]

I thought this thread was about someone called "Jesus" getting a warning.

[Husar]

Noone has any right to ask Ludens his nationality or any other personal information which is not volunteered.

WRONG!

Everybody has the right to ask Ludens about his nationality or any other personal information as long as it does not turn into harassment and Ludens in turn has the right not to answer any of it.

Darwin, banning people from asking that is like saying you don't have the right to post in lobf's thread unless he gave you written permission, this is a community and not a secret meeting of secret service members. I've asked some people about personal stuff and if they don't answer it it that's perfectly fine and makes them look like grumpy old men.

As to the actual topic, it seems a bit over the top, I've read "jeez" here quite a few times and my guess has always been that "jeez" developed as some form of "Jesus". I think it would just be fair though to keep the warning for this thread and the language he uses in it.
As Pever and others pointed out, lobf violates some rules right here in this thread, swear words shall not be blanked out just partly but completely, for example.

[pevergreen]

As Pever and others pointed out, lobf violates some rules right here in this thread, swear words shall not be blanked out just partly but completely, for example.

As we can see in the above quote, Husar breaks the most strict rule of all here on the .org.

[Beskar]

pevergreen.

---

As for the nationality question, ask him in PM if you are really curious, due to some of the replies to the thread, it is actually quite inappropriate to ask him here. You are forgetting the social context and situation. I will make it simpler for you to understand.

Guy1: Rages against Moderator over very minor thing.
Guy?: Says about situation.
Guy?: Brings up about cultures and region and other things.
Moderator: Take it to TosaInu, he will happily solve it, I thought I was doing right and did a friendly message about it.
Guy?: ZOMG YOU NOT ENGLISH I THOUGHT YOU WAS
Guy?: In my culture, we break all ten commandments as a lifestyle choice, where are you from?
Guy?: He can type better than me, where are you from?
Guy?: *calling Whine-One-One*


You can probably see from this, why asking about personal details from Ludens is inappropriate in this situation. The guy is doing his job and a good job at that.

Also what relevance does it have? If he was English for example, are you going to tell tales of how your grandma who visits church on Sunday doesn't care about taking the Lord's name in Vain?


Ergo: Chill, relax and don't hijack a crashed bandwagon.

[pevergreen]

Also what relevance does it have? If he was English for example, are you going to tell tales of how your grandma who visits church on Sunday doesn't care about taking the Lord's name in Vain?

You're missing the important question.

Does his mother wear fancy hats?

[econ21]

In all seriousness, if it offends the guy, he can talk to me about it, and why it offends him. To formally warn me is out of line, since it's a very subjective interpretation of what I was saying, and not at all my intention.

If he had simply told me it offends him and asked me not to do it again, I absolutely would have listened. Now I'm just incensed.

Deciding what is offensive speech and what is not, IS subjective and each moderator makes his or her own judgements. There is no objective book listing what may and may not be said on an internet forum - staff here have to make their own value judgements, although informed by shared experience and discussions with other staff. That does not mean everything they give warnings for offends them personally.

From the perspective of an ex-moderator, one thing you could bear in mind is that staff have a very useful forum tool for warning posters that makes it preferable to using a PM for a variety of reasons - it is quick, automatically quotes the offending text and keeps a record that all staff can consult. Now I understand that receiving a PM marked "warning" can appear incendiary, but as Banquo's Ghost said really it is little more than asking you not to do it again. When I was a mod, I initially tried to use PMs at one stage for mild cases like this, but eventually decided it was more trouble than it was worth and switched to warnings.

One reason for the warning may be that that starting a put down with the word "Jesus" is potentially incendiary and may inflame the debate. Your casual mild profanities (effin, the s-word) in this thread also are a style of posting that risks raising the temperature. Moderators are rather like firemen and try to stop careless users setting fire to our nice polite Org. I suspect you got warned for dropping a smouldering cigarette on the floor.

[lobf]

Indeed, I agree with lobf. Recieving a warning for saying Jesus is nothing short of ridiculous. I too would be completely pissed off were I in lobf's shoes. What if I'm an hellenist and someone says "By Zeus!" should they get a warning as well? What about if I was a Buddhist, people wouldn't be allowed to exclaim "Buddha!"?

I was aware that this wasn't a democracy but to go as far as warning a person for using a name, that seems a little Theocrat-leaning.

My 2 cents.

Jeez, about time. (Is Jeez okay?? It's short for Jesus, I think. Oh no!)

I think it would be worth noting that lobf was issued with a warning PM, not an infraction point.

This carries no penalty, merely recording the post and moderator's note.

These used to be called Alerts, which despite the gentler name, also tended to cause those so inclined to over-react.

It's a formal PM, that's all. When you get a warning, or even a infraction point (which does have consequences) with which you disagree, the best start is to PM the moderator. You're much more likely to get a misunderstanding over-turned.

Also, members should note the context in which a warning/infraction is given. The one word or post of itself may seem within the rules, but may be indicative of an aggressive tone throughout a thread, which, taken as a whole, the moderator feels is disrespectful or otherwise unwelcome.

A warning PM would be entirely sensible in these circumstances, because they certainly get read.

I don't care what it technically means. I was officially warned for some nonsense, commonly used exclamation. It should be rescinded because it is not any kind of violation of policy. That is not an offensive phrase unless you have a personal bias towards Christianity.

God, this thread is funny

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This guy better get an official warning too, or else I call BS.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Oh for crying out loud, it was just a PM?

[KarlXII]

The simple matter is that it IS offensive to some people, and should be considered as an offensive word.

If I were to say, "Jeez lobf, you're such a Jew", you and I would not find it as offensive as a Jewish member, just because we are not Jewish doesn't mean we can call people Jews as a derogatory term, just like the fact you're not a Christian doesn't give you an excuse to "take the Lord's name in vain" because some Christians, including I, DO find it offensive and profane.

[JAG]

The guy who got the warning - PM or otherwise - is quite right in that to get a warning for using the word jesus - no matter what context - never warrants a warning. Simply, if it offends you because you are a Chrstian - you are too easily offended.

However he probably didn't realise he didn't have to make such a big do about it - sas is right, possibly the worst example of how to go about getting a warning retracted. Sometimes just because you are right, it does mean you still have to go about things properly, something I have learnt the hard way ;)

Anyway, he probably didn't know this so give him some space.

[lobf]

The simple matter is that it IS offensive to some people, and should be considered as an offensive word.

If I were to say, "Jeez lobf, you're such a Jew", you and I would not find it as offensive as a Jewish member, just because we are not Jewish doesn't mean we can call people Jews as a derogatory term, just like the fact you're not a Christian doesn't give you an excuse to "take the Lord's name in vain" because some Christians, including I, DO find it offensive and profane.

If I were to say "you're a Jew" as I tried to insult you, it would actually be derogatory in that I'm implying Jews are bad people. I did nothing of the sort.

The guy above me said "God this thread is funny." Why don't you take offense to that?

The fact of the matter is this only offends you if you have a personal bias towards a particular religion. Nobody would say boo if I said "Zeus, you guys are touchy," or "By Buddah you guys are touchy!"

Like Jolt said

Unless its clearly a discriminatory attack on one religion, I hardly see how one can recieve warnings from something religious-related that isn't either scandalous and can't be manipulated to prevent people from saying basically anything.

It wasn't a discriminatory attack. It is a commonly used exclamation and only offensive if you are a particularly anal member of the Christian faith.

In regard to the severity of the warning: I don't know the differences between the warnings. All I know is that I have an "official Infraction." I know that in the future if action is to be taken against me for something else, the powers that be can look back and say "oh, look, we warned you for something already. time to take it to the next step."

I don't want to have a strike against me because I said nothing inherently offensive or derogatory.

[bovi]

WRONG!

Everybody has the right to ask Ludens about his nationality or any other personal information as long as it does not turn into harassment and Ludens in turn has the right not to answer any of it.

Sorry for bad choice of words. Replace ask with demand.

[Andres]

Anyways, this is bothering me, and Ludens won't change it. So, I'm complaining here.

It surprises me that you are not complaining about your aggressive posting style and bad language in posts #36, #38 and #77 of that thread and the fact that post #79, which contained the word "Jesus", was also a clear attempt at getting that thread even more heated than it already was and which eventually caused the thread to get closed...

Maybe Ludens was in a hurry (as he indicated when he closed the thread, btw) and didn't have enough time to write an elaborate explanation about why exactly your behaviour in that thread was way out of line? Not that such an explanation would be needed, as it seems pretty obvious.

All in all, I think that just a pm warning was more than fair in this case, considering your behaviour in that thread.