Got a warning for calling an ignorant person ignorant

[LazyVwj]

Arguing with a guy on suggestions and feedback without resulting to bad words. He kept contradicting everything he said so I called him ignorant and apparently it's against the rules.

[JoeW]

Correct. Once again, the community guidelines can be found here: https://forums.kleientertainment.com/guidelines/
Please be polite, constructive, on-topic and without personal attacks. 

Thanks. 

[LazyVwj]

16 minutes ago, JoeW said:

Correct. Once again, the community guidelines can be found here: https://forums.kleientertainment.com/guidelines/
Please be polite, constructive, on-topic and without personal attacks. 

Thanks. 

You're a terrible admin. It doesn't violate anything.

[Cliffford W.]

Sir you are being rude beyond anything.

Could you take actions @JoeW please ?

I apologize for the ping

[1bubbainpa]

Honestly, looking at the thread you were being passive-aggressive towards a person giving you valid criticism. I believe the warning is justified.

[Mike23Ua]

50 minutes ago, LazyVwj said:

You're a terrible admin. It doesn't violate anything.

JoeW isn’t just an Admin he’s one of the games various developers, and can actually probably prevent you from playing the game at all if your rude enough.

please be polite & don’t call people rude stuff, this is a forum & not everyone’s going to agree with your views & opinions but there’s no need for personal insults & attacks either, so be nice & maybe others will treat you with the same respect. 

[Starlogy]

1 hour ago, LazyVwj said:

You're a terrible admin. It doesn't violate anything.

You're a terrible reader.

[JoeW]

Hey everybody. Please keep posts polite. Thanks. 

[Dunk Mujunk]

I read the thread in question and I can see where OP is coming from.

While there is no need to attack JoeW-

 

I would hope the above poster was also punished for actively attempting to anger someone.

As someone once said about 3 hours ago-

3 hours ago, Starlogy said:

 

 

[MondayNight]

"Got a warning for calling an ignorant person ignorant" - that's your subjective assessment of an individual as ignorant; furthermore you should criticize the message/idea, not the messenger, as per forum rules I believe (and etiquette). Yep, I know, it can be hard, more-so for old-internet folks from the era of no-rules whatsoever except what is one's region judicial system's law - not the "politically correctness" (partially enforced via "rule of mob") we have nowadays.

As for what was given as example of "breaking the rules":

6 hours ago, Dunk Mujunk said:

I for one see absolutely nothing wrong there, in both comments. Is indeed subjective assessment but no invectives, banter (for some reason that also is considered "abusive" nowadays) or-the-like were used to warrant an "abusive behavior" cataloging. On the topic of subjective assessment:

10 hours ago, Starlogy said:

You're a terrible reader.

I can also call the case here for being openly-aggressive as opposed to mentioned above "being passive-aggressive" since you are calling OP "terrible" - who knows, I may get "terribly offended" by seeing "terrible" as appellation, right? See where this cuddling general attitude can go, more-so for the given-example?!

[Dunk Mujunk]

I should have chopped that up more, my example for breaking the rules was-

 

I'm all for letting things play out. I'm just saying I hope the disciplining was evenly handed out, and it may very well have been, who knows.

As for the possibility of viewing this subjectively, I don't think that's the case. Most obviously, the definition of good criticism is more or less the polar opposite of the example given. If the responder truly believes this to be the example of "good criticism", while their definition is incorrect, they are attempting to provide "good criticism", and therefore by their flawed definition are seeking to incite anger.

And if the responder IS aware they have given an incorrect definition of "good criticism", then they are trolling and seeking to incite anger.

I personally lean toward the responder trolling because of this bit contained in the initial response-

 

Suggesting placing two of the same item in one box is a "talent", and suggesting this "talent" applies to real life as well in this manner also suggests the OP lacks this "talent". While OP didn't handle the situation properly, the above (which as I said was contained in the original response) is where hostilities broke out in the thread.

When taken with the responders example of criticism, it seems pretty clear (to me, who knows, maybe I'm crazy) the responder had ill intentions from square 1.

Just like the NFL though, second foul is always the one that draws the flag.

I think this is an important incident in the grand scheme of these forums because over around the past 6 or so months I've seen more locked threads and general s****y behavior each individual month than I've seen in the previous entirety of my time on these forums. While the squeaky cog always gets the oil or whatever, I think in most of the cases I've seen the squeaky cog isn't the actual problem. Which is why it seems to me that attempted disciplining has actually resulted in a greater need for disciplining due to the actual problems not being addressed.

By no means am I critiquing the moderation, I know it's a tough and thankless job and I appreciate those tasked with it. This is simply how I am interpreting what I've seen on the forums lately.

[FreyaMaluk]

how is calling a person ignorant something positive? Having more knowledge on a thing doesn't give people entitlement to be a jerk.

[RoughCactus69]

You have somehow posted 17 times and embarrassed yourself on nearly all of those posts. Good job.

 

Sincerely,

Shocked Cactus

[Chesmu]

Hi, guys, thanks for sharing your opinions on this, also thanks to moderators for moving this thread instead of deleting it; I'm always a fan of being mature and letting everyone speak.

To clarify the situation explained by @Dunk Mujunk above, the actual issue at Forums are direct insults towards a specific person, often starting with a "You" word at the beginning.

Apart from that, if we are to have a meaningful, open minded forum that actually produces benefit, we must allow everyone to speak their mind as long as the situation above doesn't happen.

As for the specific quote from me, Criticism does really cause anger, I got angry myself countless times while I was posting at Seam's DST forums when someone complained about my suggestions, It's even mentioned at my Klei account details; I don't know why someone would assume that a S***ty behavior! If I was a sensitive person I would definitely go after that and get offended by it.

People are different, situations of life, native languages, and homelands are different, so a lot of the things one says can bother or even offend the other person; If we try to calculate this, we will fail due to lack of knowledge about the other Internet user, that's why I always follow this strategy at Forums: "Speak your mind and don't insult people." , and that's a win win for both parties.

That will be all.

[Dunk Mujunk]

Criticism can cause anger. However that does not mean attempts at constructive criticism should not be pursued. As JoeW said-

16 hours ago, JoeW said:

Please be polite, constructive, on-topic and without personal attacks. 

Thanks. 

One would assume the above applies to all things, criticism included. To say you (or me, or they, or he/she etc.) were once criticized and said criticism made you (or me blah blah blah) angry should not be a green light to abandon all attempts at constructive criticism in the future. 

Maybe I'm just a weirdo (I am, bit that is beside the point) but in my mind to say identifying 2 objects as the same and proceeding to place both objects in a single container is a talent, while suggesting it is outside of the ability of the person you are responding to is quite the insult, whether the word "you" is included or not.

Again, I could just be strange for thinking that way, who knows.

As for the s****y behavior line, I felt I was pretty clear in moving on to a different portion of my post, and this was not related to the thread in question.

I'm sorry you misunderstood this.

I'm by no means excusing the OP, however I personally don't see an innocent party in this incident. That's simply my view, which I am entitled to. 

[JoeW]

I'm going to clarify a couple things here. 

First. Just because somebody is given a warning, doesn't mean another person was not. The process depending on severity is this. 

• Informal Warning (a post is hidden, or a polite warning on a thread)
• Pre-emptive warning (individual warning sent saying - careful or you will get an official warning
• Official warning
• Second or final warning
• Suspension or ban
• Ban

I don't warn people for opinions that other people don't like. I don't even warn people for having a generally poor attitude, I don't believe it is my responsibility to make you likeable.  

If somebody says something that somebody interprets as being annoying or obnoxious, you can put them on ignore. However if somebody is going around and pointing at specific individuals and directly insulting them I will send warnings. MOST of the time I will pop into the thread drop a small messages to chill out and that will be that. 

Advice that I often give people is that I always direct them to read everything by removing perceived tone. We see an avatar and we attach what we think about them to a "tone" and we read those messages in those tones. So you can interpret a message in completely different ways depending on what you think about the person posting it. 

It's incredible how often people turn sour because of how they read tone in messages. And many people in this thread have been warned about this same thing. 

But here's the TL;DR

If it's not on topic, if it's not polite and constructive and specifically about the topic, it criticizes or otherwise calls out another person or their behavior, it's probably not something that needs to be said. 

You don't get to just break the rules because they might have also done the same thing. 

NOTE: And no, being super passive aggressive to be "polite" isn't ok. I'm not laying out every single possible way somebody can break the rules... "Don't be a Jerk". Thanks.