Reported Private Message by o Aperture o

[Pete]

o Aperture o has reported a private message.

Reason:

Just got this back from Jasky after I infracted him for the "********" remark.

I think he's just asked for a ban.

Sent by: Jaskys
Original Content:

Dear Jaskys,
Please tell me this a joke or you're some nazi god believer. Keep your beliefs to yourself, i don't give a single **** in what you believe

You have received an infraction at Windows Phone Central Forums.

Reason: Inappropriate Language
-------
"********" isn't cool. Tone down the language please.
-------

This infraction is worth 25 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://forums.windowscentral.com/ge...ation-not-implemented-better.html#post2570180

Because MS is ******** slow, now it is really lacking

All the best,
Windows Phone Central Forums

 

[HeyCori]

On it.

 

[a5cent]

IMHO all forum members have the responsibility to remain civil and not offend people, but we also all have the responsibility not to take offense at every turn. It's a question of balance.Which ways heavier in this case?

These things are difficult because it always involves a judgement call. Obviously, we aren't all going to judge identically.

In this case, while it was definitely uncool, I personally wouldn't have infracted for the "********" statement, but I do find the PM completely unacceptable.

Because this is my personal view, I'd let the PM go this time, but warn Jasky that PMs deemed unacceptable will also be infracted going forward.

Just to be clear, I don't think there is any wrong or right answer in any of these situations. Again, it always comes down to a judgement call.

 

[Pete]

In isolation, I'd agree. But Jasky is a bit of a problem child in that he's pretty unrestrained in his use of language and general attitude. This infraction wasn't just out of pettiness, it was partly designed to poke him. If he had accepted the infraction, that would have been fine. He chose not to.

 

[a5cent]

In isolation, I'd agree. But Jasky is a bit of a problem child in that he's pretty unrestrained in his use of language and general attitude. This infraction wasn't just out of pettiness, it was partly designed to poke him. If he had accepted the infraction, that would have been fine. He chose not to.

I see your point. The potential problem I see with that relates to consistency. What if someone who is otherwise a perfectly behaved member also uses that term. Are you then not going to infract them for it? Will Jaskys and others realize the difference? Would that not open us up to accusations of playing favourites or just being unfair?

When raising children, parents should make sure any punishment occurs quickly and is directly related to the incident that is being punished. Otherwise parents run the risk of the children not understanding the point that is being made, in which case the punishment looses all value. I suspect similar rules apply here.

Anyway. I could be wrong. Maybe I'm the only one who operates in this way. I'm just providing feedback for everyone's consideration.