Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Lou's request for clarification-negchar? » Deputy 10derHeart

Posted by Lou Pilder on November 21, 2008, at 17:38:44

In reply to Re: Lou's request for identification/rationale » Lou Pilder, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on November 21, 2008, at 13:34:44

> Sorry if the format of my post was confusing, Lou.
>
> This:
>
> > What we saw was vile hate speech
>
> is the portion I was indicating was uncivil. Any negative characterization of what a poster posts is generally considered uncivil.
>
> Hope that clarifies things.
>
> -- 10derHeart

Deputy 10derHeart,
You wrote,[...Any negative characterization of what a poster posts is...uncivil...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by {negative characterization} of what a poster posts here in relation to what BayLeaf posted as you cited.
The generally accepted meanings of {negative} and {characerization} are unknown to me as to how by stateing what one sees could fall into the catagory of being a {negative characterization} based upon my understanding of the grammatical structure of your statement.
If you could explain here what you are wanting to mean by a negative characterization in as to how Bayleaf's statement of what she sees is doing anything as to characterizing what the member posted as {negative}, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly if I was to know what you are wanting to mean here by {negative}.
I am unsure as to what if Bayleaf prefaced the statement with {I believe} as to if then that would have been left without administrative sanction or not. If you could write here as to if that would be acceptable or not, then I could respond accordingly.
I am also unsure as to if BayLeaf posted the statement you cited in an article in a link, let's say from a group that Bayleaf belongs to, that wrote that the type of words used that Bayleaf identified are of the nature that Bayleaf identified as in what your sanction to Bayleaf includes, would then be also notated as being uncivil or not, or would you ask Bayleaf to revise the link which could mean that Bayleaf could repost something else in its place, while the link remained intact, and not be sanctioned as being asked to be civil. If you could write here as to if that could be acceptable or not, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou

 

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Lou Pilder thread:863266
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081003/msgs/864510.html