PRSI Forum Rules

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
How is it that one is allowed to call Donald Trump a pedophile or Bill Clinton a rapist (there are several posts like this) but calling another member a troll is a bannable offense?

Additionally, what dictates the length of a ban, is there a set policy depending on how many warnings, etc. or is it whatever the mod feels like at the time?

These are sincere questions as there seems no real policy around them. Thanks for taking the time to address.
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,537
25,262
How is it that one is allowed to call Donald Trump a pedophile or Bill Clinton a rapist (there are several posts like this) but calling another member a troll is a bannable offense?

Additionally, what dictates the length of a ban, is there a set policy depending on how many warnings, etc. or is it whatever the mod feels like at the time?

These are sincere questions as there seems no real policy around them. Thanks for taking the time to address.
Rules are here: https://macrumors.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201265337-Forum-Rules

Attacks against Donald Trump would not be construed as a personal attack. Insulting other forum members directly is a warnable/bannable offence. This is because the moderators would like to encourage civil arguments. People should be able to disagree and articulate their arguments without resorting to personal insults. If not, they're not the sort of user that the mods would care to keep around.

From what I understand, moderators discuss amongst themselves before considering a ban, and come to an agreement based on previous conduct, in addition to what the bannable offence was. If it's a first time, often a little warning will be sent. If not, other action may be necessary. It is not a case of 'how the mods feel' at the time.

As Winston Churchill once said: “Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way, that they look forward to the trip.” :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weaselboy

Weaselboy

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 23, 2005
30,337
10,099
California
I do understand the rules, but if what we're looking for is civil discourse, then how does calling Trump a pedophile facilitate that? Just throwing that out there...
I don't disagree with your comment, but it seems like it would be tough to enforce a rule like that. Would you have mods ding every person who called Tim Cook a stupid moron? The site would need to bring on another dozen mods. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meister

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
I do understand the rules, but if what we're looking for is civil discourse, then how does calling Trump a pedophile facilitate that? Just throwing that out there...
I suppose the question is rhetorical in nature, IMO it's a double standard. The only difference is instead of saying it directly to another member we're saying it about an outside person. The question from my perspective is definitely about the expected level of civil discourse, which is policed quite heavily here but only around other members. Outside of that it's an unregulated bloodbath in that forum.
[doublepost=1465230039][/doublepost]
I don't disagree with your comment, but it seems like it would be tough to enforce a rule like that. Would you have mods ding every person who called Tim Cook a stupid moron? The site would need to bring on another dozen mods. :)
How would it be any more difficult than enforcing these rules as they do with members?
 
Last edited:

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,537
25,262
I do understand the rules, but if what we're looking for is civil discourse, then how does calling Trump a pedophile facilitate that? Just throwing that out there...
It doesn't. But if the mods begin to ban people on what they think or say about others, then that would just open a whole can of worms about thought police, free speech, etc. And as Weaselboy rightly pointed out, the extra effort involved would be unmanageable.

I would suggest that if somebody accuses without evidence that Trump is a paedophile, their opinion is not one that deserves appropriate consideration, nor a response — regardless what your opinion of Trump is. Don't take the bait, add the user to the block list, and move on.
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
Because of the sheer volume of work this would require.
I don't believe this to be their contention, the argument isn't about manpower as much as it is about civility and what's expected with one's behavior when posting, whether it be against another forum member or a politician and their ilk.
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,537
25,262
I don't believe this to be their contention, the argument isn't about manpower as much as it is about civility and what's expected with one's behavior when posting, whether it be against another forum member or a politician and their ilk.
I have found that silence is the loudest answer to such uncivil comments. If people make those sorts of statements with the intent of invoking a heated response, yet end up getting ignored by everybody, they'll eventually just be shouting to the wind (and hopefully, they'll grow up).
 

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
48,525
17,181
I don't believe this to be their contention, the argument isn't about manpower as much as it is about civility and what's expected with one's behavior when posting, whether it be against another forum member or a politician and their ilk.
Seems like there's a difference between behavior toward someone one is discussing something with and the subject that is being discussed (be it a person or something else).
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
The simple solution is to put the PRSI Forum on your Ignore List
  • Lowers your heart rate and blood pressure
  • Increases your productivity
  • Releases a flood of endorphins into your system
  • And a host of other benefits
I guess the "ignore forum" feature doesn't work the way I assumed, as in it won't hide the forum? I still see posts in the list on the right and the forum is still there on the page. As for avoiding it, that's what I'll be doing from now on (manually) just wanted to point out what I see as a glaring double standard here.
 

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
48,525
17,181
I guess the "ignore forum" feature doesn't work the way I assumed, as in it won't hide the forum? I still see posts in the list on the right and the forum is still there on the page. As for avoiding it, that's what I'll be doing from now on (manually) just wanted to point out what I see as a glaring double standard here.
Doesn't really seem like a glaring double standard when one thing is related to someone you are discussing something with while the other is about the topic of discussion (aside from it potentially being someone else here).
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
Doesn't really seem like a glaring double standard when one thing is related to someone you are discussing something with while the other is about the topic of discussion (aside from it potentially being someone else here).
post: MR User is a racist pig (unacceptable)
post: Trump or Clinton is a racist pig (acceptable)

Is the difference just a matter of speaking about the one being attacked in a third person?
 

thewitt

macrumors 68020
Sep 13, 2011
2,102
1,523
post: MR User is a racist pig (unacceptable)
post: Trump or Clinton is a racist pig (acceptable)

Is the difference just a matter of speaking about the one being attacked in a third person?
If Trump or Clinton were forum members, would these attacks be permitted?

I've been attack by forum members, both directly and in the third person. Though I've never bothered to report it, the attackers were not banned in any case.
 

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
48,525
17,181
post: MR User is a racist pig (unacceptable)
post: Trump or Clinton is a racist pig (acceptable)

Is the difference just a matter of speaking about the one being attacked in a third person?
The difference is speaking about someone that is part of this community and participates or could participate in the discussion, and speaking about an extremely public figure/persona (which is somewhat well beyond just a regular private person) who has decided to essentially put themselves for discussion. I'm not saying they are deserving of being called names or anything like that, but I am saying that there is a difference, and one that is more than just semantics.
[doublepost=1465247257][/doublepost]
If Trump or Clinton were forum members, would these attacks be permitted?

I've been attack by forum members, both directly and in the third person. Though I've never bothered to report it, the attackers were not banned in any case.
They likely wouldn't be permitted in that sense. And when attacked, things can very easily be reported, and more than likely action would be taken.
 

rshrugged

macrumors 6502a
Oct 11, 2015
921
646
I don't believe this to be their contention, the argument isn't about manpower as much as it is about civility and what's expected with one's behavior when posting, whether it be against another forum member or a politician and their ilk.
Just to add to what's been said -- I don't know Arn's original or current reasoning for allowing for a relatively lightly moderated forum, including PRSI. My guess -- there's plenty of empty brain calories potentially seen as a result but if things were more heavily moderated, valuable discussion would go missing. Ultimately, each individual has to choose to do their best, in minor or significant ways, to be part of the value stream. Sometimes that means not saying anything at all.

Calling a member a negative name is a guaranteed flame starter, either then or in the future. Explaining your position and/or reacting to others in an adult fashion adds value. MR has made available the opportunity for learning, and contributing towards others learning, about wide varieties of subject matter. Take advantage of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weaselboy

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
If Trump or Clinton were forum members, would these attacks be permitted?

I've been attack by forum members, both directly and in the third person. Though I've never bothered to report it, the attackers were not banned in any case.
As have I, however if you get under one's skin they'll surely report you. At that point only the reported post is considered, regardless of how the others have treated you in the same post. This has happened to me and others here on several occasions. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thewitt

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,086
6,454
The Black Country, England
If you believe another member is making an outlandish accusation against a public figure and they refuse to provide evidence to back their claims when challenged, then it will be breaking the forum rules and should be reported.

Sources. If you claim that something's a fact, back it up with a source. If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts. If you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread.
See the MacRumors Rules for Appropriate Debate for further information.
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,336
8,622
If you believe another member is making an outlandish accusation against a public figure and they refuse to provide evidence to back their claims when challenged, then it will be breaking the forum rules and should be reported.



See the MacRumors Rules for Appropriate Debate for further information.
OllyW, can you please explain how the "ignore forum" feature is supposed to work? When attempting, the forum still appears and recent posts still seem to show up for it. It's also checked in "forums you ignore" in the options.
 

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,086
6,454
The Black Country, England
OllyW, can you please explain how the "ignore forum" feature is supposed to work? When attempting, the forum still appears and recent posts still seem to show up for it. It's also checked in "forums you ignore" in the options.
If you ignore a forum it is still visible in the forum list and you can still access it to read threads and make posts but new posts made in the forum will not be shown in the "New Posts" or "Forum Spy" feeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ardchoille50

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,164
581
Finland
I've been attack by forum members, both directly and in the third person. Though I've never bothered to report it, the attackers were not banned in any case.
If you don't report it, we most likely won't see it. We can't read every one of the thousands of posts that are posted everyday, which is why we ask users to report any and all posts that they think are inappropriate. I can guarantee that all reports are reviewed and oftentimes discussed by multiple moderators before taking action, and you can always use the Contact Us form to have your case reviewed by an administrator if you think a moderator made a mistake.

As have I, however if you get under one's skin they'll surely report you. At that point only the reported post is considered, regardless of how the others have treated you in the same post. This has happened to me and others here on several occasions. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
That is simply not true. We always take context into account. That doesn't necessarily mean that we review the whole thread, but we do read and review posts that are relevant to the reported post as oftentimes an insult can be a result of trolling/provoking and an insult may lead to more insults. If you think we missed a post, you can always report it to bring it to our attention.

Remember that even if someone else insults you or otherwise breaks the rules, that doesn't give you a license to insult them back. From the Forum Rules under insults:

If somebody else insults you, report their post; their post does not give you a license to break the rules by returning their insults.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.