Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

  1. #1
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Beskar tried to explain this to me, but seems to have done so in a bad way since me posting in the same manner resulted in red text posting.

    Why is it acceptable to backroom rules to write:
    If someone acts like you do then they all have their brains bashed in.


    To me this does not seem to be a civil way of communicating a personal desire to beat someone to death. To be fair I'm not sure that there is a civil way to communicate such desires or "warnings", but I'm sure brighter minds can explain to me how to threaten deadly force in a civil way.

  2. #2
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albion
    Posts
    15,924
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Hello Snowhobbit,

    As I said if you wanted to discuss this openly, to post in here, I hope you don't mind me posting our exchange related to this topic which seems make you think it is "okay". I think posting the contents of our exchange on this matter might help fellow readers. This is presented in the spoilers below.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    *Note: Exchange was occurring whilst I was still moderating the topic at hand, as I just returned from work and there were 30 posts I needed to filter through. So comments such as "this is still left" was due to not finished moderating, and these were dealt with.*
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Post 43 with the death threat was reported but is still left on the forum without any changes. Do murder threats comply with the rules, or are we just not that careful about applying them?

    I have not done anything to justify threat of brutal murder, yet that threat remains on the forum. Is it to make sure that the evidence remains in case I need to lodge a police report?
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    So I can take it then that you do not support the Fragony solution of murdering all Muslims and opposition? Or do you put your head on the ground for easy reach when someone informs you he would like to break it and cause you brain damage? As a medical professional, is that adviceable? Because in my layman understanding any level of brain damage where skulls are broken is very dangerous and possibly lethal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    I have read the interaction there to double check, and this is what happened. You baited with Fragony with insults, he replied to you saying that if you said that to someone IRL, they might hurt you. He did not specify any intent to cause you harm, or go out of his way to trouble you. He simply responded that you provoking people in that manner could be met with physical repercussions.

    As for the references to causing you Brain damage, Fragony said that there would be no point in such behaviour to cause it, as you are already "brain damaged".
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    No he was pretty clear in what he'd like to do with me, and offered up his personal information so that I can come meet him face to face.

    So that I understand, so long as anyone offends me first I can threaten to kill them at the Org? So when Pannonion attacked me the appropriate response would be for me to tell him that I or people like me will beat his brains out, in accordance with the "sticks and stones may break my bones, but mean words and analysis of a world run by a drug user is what we think is really bad" rule?
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    Fragony did not offer up his personal information so you can meet him face-to-face in the topic. Fragony offered it up saying that you must have him as the wrong person, and he was trying to provide said personal information to argue "I am this person". To quote Fragony himself (bar removal of personal information:
    What meetings, I have absolutily no idea what you are talking about. Feel free to look it up, My name is ####, I live in ####,####. I have never been to a meeting whatsoever, I have never voted. I don't care about politics.
    This is not an invite for you to hook up with him and for you to meet him face-to-face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Ok, so to be clear it is in accordance with forum rules if someone insults me to tell that person that people who talk like that get stabbed with knives, or is blunt trauma the only permissible way to inflict grievous bodily harm or worse?
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Well you just said in a previous PM that what Fragony did is ok because I provoked him into delivering a thinly veiled death threat. What other criminal actions are allowed to be hinted at in thinly veiled threats against people who offend me?
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    What I have said that he did not threaten you directly, and corrected your suggestions that he did do, including an accusation which wasn't supported by the facts that he provided you with his address to meet him face-to-face in order to deliver these. I never said the content of his post was "totally okay and in line with Org rules" or implied otherwise, it wasn't and it was handled separately.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    You excused his behaviour because it is only a thinly veiled threat, not a direct threat. I was unaware that it is acceptable to make thinly veiled threats and call people brain-dead, it has beena very educational day on what is allowed and not allowed on the forum.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    I'll just refer to this PM when someone insults or offends me then, thanks for clearing up the strange death threats rule.


    Tl;dr version:
    Snowhobbit: Fragony is making death threats and is going to murder me.
    Beskar: No, Fragony is not going to murder you, you are misreading.
    Snowhobbit: But HE IS!
    Beskar: No, I examined his wording and Fragony is rather explicit in what he is saying, and he is not advocating violence. [Detailed waffle to described what happened]
    Snowhobbit: So it is okay for me to say that he will do brutal violence against me if I word it like the OP?
    Beskar: No, it wasn't and this is being handled separately with Fragony.
    Snowhobbit: Oh cool, it is totally fine then!
    Beskar: No, it isn't.
    Snowhobbit: Well I can go around justifying violence if I say it is some random thug in the street.

    I feel I have explained this adequately to you, and your insistence on this matter not being resolved is one-sided. I have explained that threats are against the rules, and I have explained the specific situation to you as you was misinterpreting what was stated and continue to misinterpret my responses.

    If someone is more able to explain this to you, they are free to attempt this.
    Last edited by Beskar; 04-03-2016 at 18:34.
    Days since the Apocalypse began
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."

  3. #3
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    Hello Snowhobbit,

    As I said if you wanted to discuss this openly, to post in here, I hope you don't mind me posting our exchange related to this topic which seems make you think it is "okay". I think posting the contents of our exchange on this matter might help fellow readers. This is presented in the spoilers below.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    *Note: Exchange was occurring whilst I was still moderating the topic at hand, as I just returned from work and there were 30 posts I needed to filter through. So comments such as "this is still left" was due to not finished moderating, and these were dealt with.*











    Tl;dr version:
    Snowhobbit: Fragony is making death threats and is going to murder me.
    Beskar: No, Fragony is not going to murder you, you are misreading.
    Snowhobbit: But HE IS!
    Beskar: No, I examined his wording and Fragony is rather explicit in what he is saying, and he is not advocating violence. [Detailed waffle to described what happened]
    Snowhobbit: So it is okay for me to say that he will do brutal violence against me if I word it like the OP?
    Beskar: No, it wasn't and this is being handled separately with Fragony.
    Snowhobbit: Oh cool, it is totally fine then!
    Beskar: No, it isn't.
    Snowhobbit: Well I can go around justifying violence if I say it is some random thug in the street.

    I feel I have explained this adequately to you, and your insistence on this matter not being resolved is one-sided. I have explained that threats are against the rules, and I have explained the specific situation to you as you was misinterpreting what was stated and continue to misinterpret my responses.

    If someone is more able to explain this to you, they are free to attempt this.
    Normally when we wonder if we have permission of someone to do something we ask that person.

    When you post a conversation it is nice if you do not edit it and then grossly misrepresent what I say in aTL:DR fiction. Do you always present arguments by hiding parts of the conversation, or only occasionally?

  4. #4
    Iron Fist Senior Member Husar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    15,617

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit View Post
    Do you always present arguments by hiding parts of the conversation, or only occasionally?
    Do you always ask this type of question when you have no real leg to stand on?


    "Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu

  5. #5
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Husar View Post
    Do you always ask this type of question when you have no real leg to stand on?
    When someone quotes a conversation without asking and does not include the whole conversation, that is questionable.

    Do you always presume the best of Beskar and the worst of me?

  6. #6
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albion
    Posts
    15,924
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Full conversation. I didn't omit parts to misrepresent you, it only omitted parts for brevity in regards to the matter at hand.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    Hello Snowhobbit,

    I think it is pretty clear you went off on a tangent in personally attacking Fragony. I think you will admit that you didn't pull any punches as you laid into him with your keyboard.

    if Fragony did threaten to kill you/your friends/etc as mentioned, then please report these instances and they will be dealt with. However, because a member upset you previously, it doesn't give you the right to dreg it up into an emotive topic and begin the abuse.

    I had no issues with points which contribute to the argument, or criticise another users arguments. However, you did cross the line in this occasion with attacking the person, and you were the clear instigator in this incident.

    Best wishes,

    Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    I'm sorry, could you please specify which specific post or phrasing was a personal attack?

    Post 43 with the death threat was reported but is still left on the forum without any changes. Do murder threats comply with the rules, or are we just not that careful about applying them?

    Were you not around on the forum when Fragony was posting about some friends going to beat up on immigrants and him asking if he should join them? If you post that you love to paint, am I attacking you for asking if you have painted anything knew?

    I have not done anything to justify threat of brutal murder, yet that threat remains on the forum. Is it to make sure that the evidence remains in case I need to lodge a police report?

    When exactly is it in your mind ok to threaten murder?
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    #1 - Personal attacks?
    "I'm not surprised, you are honestly a very bad person and I dread the day that people like you get real power and influence in Europe, things will not be prettyknown.

    You really should lay off the drugs so that you can stop confusing your fever-dreams with what people actually say and think."
    and that was only the first post.

    #2 I haven't finished with moderating the topic yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Yes? Are you looking forward to the day that Fragony puts all Muslims he does not personally know in concentration camps? I was unaware of the cheer at the extermination of Muslims rule.

    So I can take it then that you do not support the Fragony solution of murdering all Muslims and opposition? Or do you put your head on the ground for easy reach when someone informs you he would like to break it and cause you brain damage? As a medical professional, is that adviceable? Because in my layman understanding any level of brain damage where skulls are broken is very dangerous and possibly lethal.
    Hello again,

    #2 (continued)
    I have read the interaction there to double check, and this is what happened. You baited with Fragony with insults, he replied to you saying that if you said that to someone IRL, they might hurt you. He did not specify any intent to cause you harm, or go out of his way to trouble you. He simply responded that you provoking people in that manner could be met with physical repercussions.

    As for the references to causing you Brain damage, Fragony said that there would be no point in such behaviour to cause it, as you are already "brain damaged".

    #3 Fragony has not advocated murdering all muslims.

    Best wishes,

    Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    No he was pretty clear in what he'd like to do with me, and offered up his personal information so that I can come meet him face to face.

    So that I understand, so long as anyone offends me first I can threaten to kill them at the Org? So when Pannonion attacked me the appropriate response would be for me to tell him that I or people like me will beat his brains out, in accordance with the "sticks and stones may break my bones, but mean words and analysis of a world run by a drug user is what we think is really bad" rule?
    Hello again,

    Fragony did not offer up his personal information so you can meet him face-to-face in the topic. Fragony offered it up saying that you must have him as the wrong person, and he was trying to provide said personal information to argue "I am this person". To quote Fragony himself (bar removal of personal information:
    What meetings, I have absolutily no idea what you are talking about. Feel free to look it up, My name is ####, I live in ####,####. I have never been to a meeting whatsoever, I have never voted. I don't care about politics.
    This is not an invite for you to hook up with him and for you to meet him face-to-face.

    You are either heavily misreading his posts, or you are fabricating information. I would prefer for it to be the former, and not the latter, as the latter means it is my prerogative to suggest a time-out for users.

    Best wishes,

    Beskar.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Ok, so to be clear it is in accordance with forum rules if someone insults me to tell that person that people who talk like that get stabbed with knives, or is blunt trauma the only permissible way to inflict grievous bodily harm or worse?
    Hello,

    Please point out where it is permissible?

    Best wishes,

    Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    Well you just said in a previous PM that what Fragony did is ok because I provoked him into delivering a thinly veiled death threat. What other criminal actions are allowed to be hinted at in thinly veiled threats against people who offend me?
    Hello,

    I just double-checked my PM's to you, and I never claimed this?

    What I have said that he did not threaten you directly, and corrected your suggestions that he did do, including an accusation which wasn't supported by the facts that he provided you with his address to meet him face-to-face in order to deliver these. I never said the content of his post was "totally okay and in line with Org rules" or implied otherwise, it wasn't and it was handled separately.

    I don't think there is anything more to be said on the topic now.

    Best wishes,

    Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    You excused his behaviour because it is only a thinly veiled threat, not a direct threat. I was unaware that it is acceptable to make thinly veiled threats and call people brain-dead, it has beena very educational day on what is allowed and not allowed on the forum.
    Hello Snowhobbit,

    Thank you for the PM.

    Best Wishes,
    Beskar
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit
    I'll just refer to this PM when someone insults or offends me then, thanks for clearing up the strange death threats rule.

    Yes, I was feeling strained in having to repeat myself at the end of the exchange.

    TL;DR version to my opinion is an accurate representation of our conversation in a very simplistic and brief format.

    As for "Without Asking", the Watchtower provides a format for me to delve into issues surrounding members and you explicitly referenced to our exchange. By posting in here, you are agreeing for these topics to be discussed openly and I am permitted to post information to support the facts. This includes me being able to post messages sent to me in private, such as our communication in order to provide transparency on the issue. For brevity and because I was only addressing the opening-post, I only posted the contents of the conversation which was directly related to the opening post. Since you questioned my integrity, saying I am attempting to misrepresent you, I have taken this as consent to discuss the infraction with you, and as such, provided transparency to the whole exchange in order to keep my integrity intact.
    Last edited by Beskar; 04-03-2016 at 19:18.
    Days since the Apocalypse began
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."

  7. #7
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    Full conversation. I didn't omit parts to misrepresent you, it only omitted parts for brevity in regards to the matter at hand.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 











    Yes, I was feeling strained in having to repeat myself at the end of the exchange.

    TL;DR version to my opinion is an accurate representation of our conversation in a very simplistic and brief format.

    As for "Without Asking", the Watchtower provides a format for me to delve into issues surrounding members and you explicitly referenced to our exchange. By posting in here, you are agreeing for these topics to be discussed openly and I am permitted to post information to support the facts. This includes me being able to post messages sent to me in private, such as our communication in order to provide transparency on the issue. For brevity and because I was only addressing the opening-post, I only posted the contents of the conversation which was directly related to the opening post. Since you questioned my integrity, saying I am attempting to misrepresent you, I have taken this as consent to discuss the infraction with you, and as such, provided transparency to the whole exchange in order to keep my integrity intact.
    "He simply responded that you provoking people in that manner could be met with physical repercussions." This does not imply that it is wrong to write such things, it rather implies the opposite. It implies that if I am provoked then it is within rules for me to post what I think the physical response of people would be if someone said something like that in public. If it is implied to be within the rules then it should not render red text warnings.

  8. #8
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albion
    Posts
    15,924
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit View Post
    "He simply responded that you provoking people in that manner could be met with physical repercussions." This does not imply that it is wrong to write such things, it rather implies the opposite. It implies that if I am provoked then it is within rules for me to post what I think the physical response of people would be if someone said something like that in public. If it is implied to be within the rules then it should not render red text warnings.
    As I said then:
    I have said that he did not threaten you directly, and corrected your suggestions that he did do, including an accusation which wasn't supported by the facts that he provided you with his address to meet him face-to-face in order to deliver these. I never said the content of his post was "totally okay and in line with Org rules" or implied otherwise, it wasn't and it was handled separately.
    I was rather explicit on the matter, and this has not changed.
    Last edited by Beskar; 04-03-2016 at 19:29.
    Days since the Apocalypse began
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."

  9. #9
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    As I said then:


    I was rather explicit on the matter, and this has not changed.
    Again, "he simply responded" does not come off as saying it is not ok but rather excusing thinly veiled threats. It was dealt with, giving the previous statement rather implies a cake as congratulations on cleverly circumventing the rules than handing out a warning or infraction. By the by as you mentioned that in the other thread, if members get disgusting PMs then if those are sanctioned it might be good to inform the person who got the message that this happened. Otherwise one might think that it would be OK to write, to nobody in particular:
    Title: I'm sorry
    Body: that your mom had an abortion and you came out as the afterbirth.

    Of course if it is not ok to wish people were never born then the above is not ok. But then it would somehow need to be communicated that writing things like that is not ok.

  10. #10
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albion
    Posts
    15,924
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Not all rules are equal. Punishment for stealing bread is not the same as committing murder. There is a fundamental and significant difference between "Saying vile comments like that to someones face in person will probably occur in physical repercussions." and "I am going to come there and smash your skull in, here is my address, come at me.". You may not be able to tell the difference, but there is a clear one. It was also qualified within the post you were referring to that Fragony himself would not do such behaviour towards you, as he felt you were not worth the effort. He did not issue a threat.

    As for the second matter you brought up, it is a given that any private message titled: "I'm Sorry" with the message: "YOU WERE BORN!!!!!" that was reported to the moderators would be dealt it, and in this case, it was.
    Last edited by Beskar; 04-03-2016 at 20:31.
    Days since the Apocalypse began
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."

  11. #11
    Iron Fist Senior Member Husar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    15,617

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowhobbit View Post
    Do you always presume the best of Beskar and the worst of me?
    Do you always think that asking these questions helps in some way?


    "Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu

  12. #12
    Banned Snowhobbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    Not all rules are equal. Punishment for stealing bread is not the same as committing murder. There is a fundamental and significant difference between "Saying vile comments like that to someones face in person will probably occur in physical repercussions." and "I am going to come there and smash your skull in, here is my address, come at me.". You may not be able to tell the difference, but there is a clear one. It was also qualified within the post you were referring to that Fragony himself would not do such behaviour towards you, as he felt you were not worth the effort. He did not issue a threat.

    As for the second matter you brought up, it is a given that any private message titled: "I'm Sorry" with the message: "YOU WERE BORN!!!!!" that was reported to the moderators would be dealt it, and in this case, it was.
    I'm glad that it was, but given my experience with a certain part of the moderating team it is far from clear.

    I hope that your keyboard has been fixed and you can now write that something is against the rules without any issues.

  13. #13
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Civility and threats of grievous bodily harm or worse.

    You have absolutily nothing to worry about Snowhobbit, I don't even know what you are talking about. I really don't understand all this. I mean you no harm whatsoever
    Last edited by Fragony; 04-04-2016 at 11:04.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO