The moderation guidelines of this forum currently read (in part):
I don't believe though that we all are agreed upon what exactly constitutes an insult, so my purpose in starting this thread is to explain my understanding and hopefully stimulate some discussion.
Firstly, I reject Dan's assertion (in another thread) that "[t]here's no such thing an agreed insult. ... Insult is a subjective standard that you simply have to work out for yourself." Words like "dickhead" and "fuckwit" are extremely pejorative and can reasonably be said to be generally agreed upon as insulting (with an exception that I'll mention shortly). After that though: yes, there is a blurry line that demarcates an insult from a simple comment or criticism and which is somewhat subjective. So let's try to clarify that line.
Intent, interpretation and context matter in determining whether something written or said is insulting. Here is where the exception that I mentioned above comes in: when a white person calls a black person "nigger", it is usually extremely offensive; when a black person calls another black person "nigger" it is often (but not always) a term of endearment. Friends and those on good terms with one another will often rib each other with what might otherwise be taken as an insult but which in the context is neither intended nor interpreted as one. It's my opinion though that in such situations the ultimate judge of whether a comment is insulting or not is the subject of the "insult". It is up to the "insulter" to make sure that the "insult" will not be interpreted as such. Honest mistakes are bound to occur and I don't think that anyone should be warned for such a mistake, merely encouraged to exercise better judgement next time.
Next I'd like to provide a working definition of an insult: "a negative statement about another person or group of people that is offensive or that disparages or denigrates, whether the statement is true or not". Whether a statement is offensive, disparaging or denigrating depends a lot on how it is phrased and in which context it arises. I'll contrast insults against criticism by providing an example. "God Betty, you're a fat porker!" coming from a relative stranger might reasonably be characterised as an insult. It might be a true statement, but what is to be gained by pointing out what Betty already knows other than to demean her? Contrast this with something like "Hey Betty, you know how you're always complaining that you have trouble attracting men? I think that it might have something to do with the fact that you're so overweight." Both of these raise the issue of Betty's weight; one does it in an insulting way and one does it in a constructively critical way.
One yardstick then that I intend on using in determining whether, on this forum, a particular thing that has been written is insulting or merely critical is whether there is anything of benefit in it for the subject of the criticism/insult. I'm pretty likely to interpret the unqualified statement "That guy is an asshole" as an insult to the guy in question, whereas if it had been phrased as "That guy has been ranting his personal beliefs without justifying himself and has unfairly mischaracterised people who disagree with him; these are signs of poor character" then I would classify it as merely criticism: there's something solid for the "asshole" to grip onto to understand why he's being responded to negatively.
I also want to clarify what I meant by an "incidental insult" in the moderation guidelines. What I meant is that I might even tolerate the word "asshole" if it were accompanied by similar reasoning as above - i.e. I might tolerate the substitution of "an asshole" for "poor character" in the above-quoted sentence. Since writing that, though, I have changed my mind. I don't want even incidental insults to be acceptable on this forum. Furthermore, I have changed my mind about the "Victor Clause" - the one that reads "Posters who are judged in the eyes of the moderator/s of the forum to be particularly significant and worthwhile contributors may be given additional leeway in terms of humourous and/or insulting contributions." I now believe that insults should be flat-out unacceptable on this forum, no matter what level of intelligence the poster happens to possess.
What do you think?
Incidental humour is acceptable, and incidental insults are tolerated, however humour and insults should not come to predominate a poster's contributions to this forum, nor come to be excessive, at the risk of the poster being warned or banned. Posters who are judged in the eyes of the moderator/s of the forum to be particularly significant and worthwhile contributors may be given additional leeway in terms of humourous and/or insulting contributions.
I don't believe though that we all are agreed upon what exactly constitutes an insult, so my purpose in starting this thread is to explain my understanding and hopefully stimulate some discussion.
Firstly, I reject Dan's assertion (in another thread) that "[t]here's no such thing an agreed insult. ... Insult is a subjective standard that you simply have to work out for yourself." Words like "dickhead" and "fuckwit" are extremely pejorative and can reasonably be said to be generally agreed upon as insulting (with an exception that I'll mention shortly). After that though: yes, there is a blurry line that demarcates an insult from a simple comment or criticism and which is somewhat subjective. So let's try to clarify that line.
Intent, interpretation and context matter in determining whether something written or said is insulting. Here is where the exception that I mentioned above comes in: when a white person calls a black person "nigger", it is usually extremely offensive; when a black person calls another black person "nigger" it is often (but not always) a term of endearment. Friends and those on good terms with one another will often rib each other with what might otherwise be taken as an insult but which in the context is neither intended nor interpreted as one. It's my opinion though that in such situations the ultimate judge of whether a comment is insulting or not is the subject of the "insult". It is up to the "insulter" to make sure that the "insult" will not be interpreted as such. Honest mistakes are bound to occur and I don't think that anyone should be warned for such a mistake, merely encouraged to exercise better judgement next time.
Next I'd like to provide a working definition of an insult: "a negative statement about another person or group of people that is offensive or that disparages or denigrates, whether the statement is true or not". Whether a statement is offensive, disparaging or denigrating depends a lot on how it is phrased and in which context it arises. I'll contrast insults against criticism by providing an example. "God Betty, you're a fat porker!" coming from a relative stranger might reasonably be characterised as an insult. It might be a true statement, but what is to be gained by pointing out what Betty already knows other than to demean her? Contrast this with something like "Hey Betty, you know how you're always complaining that you have trouble attracting men? I think that it might have something to do with the fact that you're so overweight." Both of these raise the issue of Betty's weight; one does it in an insulting way and one does it in a constructively critical way.
One yardstick then that I intend on using in determining whether, on this forum, a particular thing that has been written is insulting or merely critical is whether there is anything of benefit in it for the subject of the criticism/insult. I'm pretty likely to interpret the unqualified statement "That guy is an asshole" as an insult to the guy in question, whereas if it had been phrased as "That guy has been ranting his personal beliefs without justifying himself and has unfairly mischaracterised people who disagree with him; these are signs of poor character" then I would classify it as merely criticism: there's something solid for the "asshole" to grip onto to understand why he's being responded to negatively.
I also want to clarify what I meant by an "incidental insult" in the moderation guidelines. What I meant is that I might even tolerate the word "asshole" if it were accompanied by similar reasoning as above - i.e. I might tolerate the substitution of "an asshole" for "poor character" in the above-quoted sentence. Since writing that, though, I have changed my mind. I don't want even incidental insults to be acceptable on this forum. Furthermore, I have changed my mind about the "Victor Clause" - the one that reads "Posters who are judged in the eyes of the moderator/s of the forum to be particularly significant and worthwhile contributors may be given additional leeway in terms of humourous and/or insulting contributions." I now believe that insults should be flat-out unacceptable on this forum, no matter what level of intelligence the poster happens to possess.
What do you think?
