Topic: Forum Policy - Threads reference forum members

[Ratliff]

Another forum I frequent has an explicit rule stating that threads which directly reference forum members are forbidden. I think such a rule makes sense and should be considered for this site. I also think that rules forbidding harassment of other members should be more consistently enforced here (to the extend it doesn't place an undue burden on moderators).

[vandermolen]

I see that a lot of people have read this post but nobody has yet replied. So here goes. I agree with your last sentence, although I suspect that most people here are able to look after themselves or they can always pull the plug on their membership if they've had enough. I'm not exactly sure what you meant by your opening sentence. At first I read it as if you felt we should not refer to any other forum member by name - but I rather like using people's names as it is friendlier IMO (depending on what you say I guess!) However, on reading your post again I think you mean that we should not mention a member's name in the title of a thread (as in, for example, 'Yet another pointless thread by vandermolen'). Yet, even here I'm not so sure. I don't really have a strong view and think that it all depends on the context in which the name is used.
This probably isn't very clearly expressed but I felt that I wanted to reply and please accept it as a genuine attempt to address your concerns.

[Ratliff]

Your latter interpretation of my suggestion is correct, it should not be allowed to start a thread whose topic (referenced in the thread title) is a forum member. It doesn't come up too often, but at the time I made my suggestion I saw a proliferation of threads whose purpose was to criticize a forum member.

[Gurn Blanston]

Your latter interpretation of my suggestion is correct, it should not be allowed to start a thread whose topic (referenced in the thread title) is a forum member. It doesn't come up too often, but at the time I made my suggestion I saw a proliferation of threads whose purpose was to criticize a forum member.

Hmmm, I was going to start one about you spelling your new username wrong, but I guess I won't now.  

I think your original point needs to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, since as you say, it is a rarity to have this occur, and some of the time the thread is complimentary rather than derogatory. In the event this were to come up (as in, for example, 'Yet another pointless thread by vandermolen'), it can easily be dealt with as an ad hominem attack without having an added rule. It would be useful if such threads were reported so it didn't drag on for a day or two without getting noticed.

Thanks!
GB 

[vandermolen]

Your latter interpretation of my suggestion is correct, it should not be allowed to start a thread whose topic (referenced in the thread title) is a forum member. It doesn't come up too often, but at the time I made my suggestion I saw a proliferation of threads whose purpose was to criticize a forum member.

Yes, that's not good. I agree.

[Ratliff]

Hmmm, I was going to start one about you spelling your new username wrong, but I guess I won't now.  

That's mortifying. 

[Gurn Blanston]

That's mortifying. 

No, please don't feel that way. Stuff happens. Look at the upside: it made me look up 'Tosca' which I have never seen or heard, just to find out if you were right then or right now. So THAT happened...  

[Ratliff]

No, please don't feel that way. Stuff happens. Look at the upside: it made me look up 'Tosca' which I have never seen or heard, just to find out if you were right then or right now. So THAT happened...  

You noticed it was different, which was more than I was capable of.

[Marc]

You noticed it was different, which was more than I was capable of.

Lol.
I did notice it also, but I just assumed that it was technically not possible to pick one of your former/earlier user names and therefore you had chosen 'Scapia'.

But to me, 'Scapia' sounds like a lost bleating goat in the desert, so recently I chose to refer to you (though not in a topic title) as 'the Baron'.

I also notice your name is changed now. (Yes, I'm razor sharp.)

Btw: I agree with your proposal.

[TMHeimer]

I agree with the case by case method. I belong to ScubaBoard, which has I think about 200K members. Sometimes people include their real names as part of their "signature". Then others refer to that person's post and their real name. I suppose they don't care if their real name is used. But inappropriate comments may mean a warning from the mods, deletions and possibly banishment. That happens anyway regardless of whether a real name was used.

[Gurn Blanston]

I agree with the case by case method. I belong to ScubaBoard, which has I think about 200K members. Sometimes people include their real names as part of their "signature". Then others refer to that person's post and their real name. I suppose they don't care if their real name is used. But inappropriate comments may mean a warning from the mods, deletions and possibly banishment. That happens anyway regardless of whether a real name was used.

Thanks for that. I believe in this case that the thrust here is to not start a thread about 'So-and-so is a twit", rather than 'So-and-so is really James Bundy'. We did have a couple of threads go in that direction, and they were deleted. But it's true, there isn't a hard and fast rule about starting threads like that. So it would rely on application of the ad hominem attack rule. Either way, a smacking would be in order. We try to promote civility here through reliance upon maturity, which in and of itself makes us one of the more outré web locations.