# The Ubuntu Forum Community > Ubuntu Community Discussions > Resolution Centre >  Am I being singled out?

## solwic

I received an infraction today for "Insulting Others" because I stated a simple truth:  Richard Stallman is an idiot.  He is.  There's no arguing it.

I didn't insult any user of the forum.  

It's only 1 point and there's no write restrictions, but it's the principle of the matter.  Did the mod in question even read the whole thread, so that the post could be taken in context?  I mean no disrespect, but I find reaching the conclusion he/she did with full knowledge of the direction and context of the conversation a very broad leap to make.  

Just curious.  If it matters, I'll state again that I was insulting no other user of this forum, which means an infraction for insulting another user of this forum is pure fallacy.  

But please, know that I mean no disrespect.  Just asking a question.

----------


## solwic

Also, so there's no misunderstanding later, I replied to the message the mod sent me, and I'll post it here, just as a precaution:




> For clarification, I was not referring to _any_ user of the forum.  I was referring to Richard Stallman who is, frankly, an idiot.  
> 
> Therefor I did not violate any of the terms of use of this forum, and respectfully request this infraction be dropped and any points/restrictions be removed.  
> 
> Again, I did not insult _any_ user of this forum at all and broke no rules.  Why am I being punished?  Is it because I questioned the staff's policies a few weeks ago, and this is retaliation?  
> 
> I even called Richard Stallman an idiot in humor.  We are allowed to joke here, yes?
> 
> Hoping this is a big misunderstanding,
> ...


Granted I was a little miffed when I replied, and please forgive my irritation.  It just gets tiring logging in and finding infractions for things that are taken differently from how I said and meant them.

----------


## overdrank

For the admin
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...+pledge+noobie
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1078531

----------


## KiwiNZ

I will look at this and comeback

----------


## KiwiNZ

Point one , staff do not engage in retaliation and it is bordering on an insult to suggest this.

Secondly as many members do not use their real names on this Forum you cannot say for certain that Richard stallman is not a member here.

Thirdly the COC of conduct prescribes the standards for posting here , in particular , no insults and posting with respect to others .

The moderator acted well with in the authority of the COC  andthe infraction issued is appropriate.

----------


## jdong

I concur with KiwiNZ on this -- we do not call each other "idiots" in this community, whether or not the other party is a member of this forums or believed to use Ubuntu or not.

You are not being singled out either -- the same actions would have been taken for anyone else saying the same.


John

----------


## matthew

I support the previously stated judgment and would like to quote the applicable portion of the Forum Code of Conduct, emphasis mine.



> Flaming and condescending messages: Flames are messages that personally attack, call people names, or otherwise harass another forum member (or _any person or group_). These, along with any generally condescending posts will be moved or removed at the moderators discretion.

----------


## solwic

Ah.  I stand corrected.  I shall moderate my future posts so that there is no conceivable way my intention can be mistaken.  

Thank you for the clarification.




> Point one , staff do not engage in retaliation _and it is bordering on an insult to suggest this._


I wasn't suggesting it.  I was asking if it was the case.  An honest question, given three infractions in fifteen days after seven straight months with no trouble at all.

You say it isn't so, and jdong backs you up, which is good enough for me.  Please bear in mind I was only asking a question.  I never once suggested that was the case.  

Thanks again for the clarification.  Further posts will be stated much more clearly.   :Smile:

----------


## solwic

> I support the previously stated judgment and would like to quote the applicable portion of the Forum Code of Conduct, emphasis mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				Flaming and condescending messages: Flames are messages that personally attack, call people names, or otherwise harass another forum member (or any person or group). These, along with any generally condescending posts will be moved or removed at the moderators discretion.


I know I should leave this alone, but that statement is so hypocritical that I can't let it go.

If "personally attack[ing], call[ing] people names, or otherwise harass[ing] another forum member (or any person or group)" is against the CoC, then why are you not handing down infractions to every person who calls someone else a troll?  It's personally attacking them, calling them a name, and harassing them all at the same time.  

I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find posts from moderators who have personally attacked another user by calling them a name (troll) and otherwise generally harassing them (closing their thread/demeaning them/etc.).

I'm not questioning the rules, or accusing anybody, or doing anything else that could get me banned/infracted/suspended/limited.  I've gotten over the silly little infraction point that this post started out challenging.  

I realize I have no authority on this forum and believe me when I say that I am not being rhetorical or hyperbolic.  I'm honestly curious how a person squares enforcing that section of the CoC selectively, simply because "troll" is an acceptable derogatory term in this community while "idiot" is not.

And the argument that "well, trolls _are_ trolls" doesn't hold water either.  Idiots are idiots, too, yet I was given an infraction point for stating it.

I read in another post here that even the mods are not above question.  So I ask this question:  why the double standard?

Thanks.

----------


## matthew

Post links to specific instances and we can talk. Vague generalities casually tossed around are not worthy of a response.

----------


## jdong

also keep in mind that just because you see such a message on the forums doesn't mean that the staff particularly approve of the content -- the infraction / warning history is not public for posts and historically a lot of the "but he was doing the same thing in that post" rebuttals in the Res Center pointed out posts that we've already taken action upon  :Smile:

----------


## KiwiNZ

I think we need to step back from the brink. I believe we are not that far apart.

For something like a Forum its next to impossible to have hard and fast rules, there will always be circumstances that require a selective approach.

We need in my opinion have to apply  a rule for this forum is   everyone deserves to have a good experience here .

Yes mistakes can be made , I know for sure I make many mistakes, the best is to realize this , accept and learn.

----------


## solwic

> I think we need to step back from the brink. I believe we are not that far apart.
> 
> For something like a Forum its next to impossible to have hard and fast rules, there will always be circumstances that require a selective approach.
> 
> We need in my opinion have to apply  a rule for this forum is   everyone deserves to have a good experience here .
> 
> Yes mistakes can be made , I know for sure I make many mistakes, the best is to realize this , accept and learn.


I'll let it go...just curious.  Hypocrisies always bother me, though they should not.  It's human nature.

@matthew:  I'm not sure why you're being defensive.  I wasn't attacking anybody, just honestly curious.  The "troll" thing isn't going away (and if you want specific threads, just browse the Testimonials sub-forum...they're everywhere), and I understand that.  Just trying to square the logic up.  

Anyway, I'll shut up now.  It's easy for little things to become big things online, and this is one of those little things.  

As far as I'm concerned, the issue is resolved and put to bed.   :Smile:

----------


## Perfect Storm

For the admins; http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1078753

----------


## solwic

> Post links to specific instances and we can talk. Vague generalities casually tossed around are not worthy of a response.


As a final post on the matter, please see this thread.

In particular, this post:




> Moved to Testimonials & Experiences.
> 
> Just as a side note: If the OP wants to continue trolling, let them, but don't offer support in this thread, that's not it's purpose.
> 
> If the OP realises that they can get great support by posting reasonably worded questions in the forums, then we can offer help


"If the OP wants to continue trolling..." is the same as "If the OP wants to continue being an idiot..."

This is not to slight the moderator; I don't even know Joeb454.  But you requested specifics.  There they are.

Thanks again for taking the time to explain this to me.  I imagine you guys deal with a lot of crap day-to-day, and I am humbly thankful and appreciative that you have been so patient.   :Smile:

----------


## jdong

Well I would like to point out that "trolling" is a colloquialism labeling his actions, and that it is not the same thing as calling someone an idiot, which is more or less just a direct insult on their intelligence.

----------


## solwic

> Well I would like to point out that "trolling" is a colloquialism labeling his actions, and that it is not the same thing as calling someone an idiot, which is more or less just a direct insult on their intelligence.


 :Biggrin: 

Like I said, I've let it go.  I've learned a lot about the forums dealing with you guys, and I've even come to respect a couple of you.  

It's an infraction point, meant, I'm sure, as more of a warning than any kind of "punishment".  

Warning received.   :Smile: 

Thanks again, especially to jdong and KiwiNZ.

----------

