MKSheppard and DR6

[SirNitram]

I am starting this off like this:

Being an obnoxious Right Winger is not against the rules here. Nor is the disgusting brand of black humour that is the Shep Solution.

But violating the debating rules? A bit more clear. Thread In Question

If you are asked for evidence to support a claim you've made, you should either produce this evidence or concede the point until such time as you can produce this evidence. People who consistently ignore requests for evidence to support their claims (particularly contentious claims) are not looked upon kindly here.

Debate on what measures, if any, should be used, begin. As always, additional evidence may be presented. Note that, as always, I am a cruel and capricious overlord, and posting something just to go 'SHEP SAID SOMETHING NASTY' or 'SHEP SOLUTION, BAN HIM!' will earn my wrath. Rules violations only to be discussed.

(And of course, if Elfdart really does blow off DR 6 like claimed, I'd love links to such cases. I'd like a two-for-one.)

[Gil Hamilton]

Well, he was trolling that thread and he was evading like crazy with Surlethe demanding he actually back up his little claim there. That is a violation of the rule quoted and frankly, he's had a history of going into threads and purposely being imflammatory to derail them. Him going "But... but... Elfdart!" isn't an excuse.

Perhaps a title or a short tempban would be a good lesson.

[LadyTevar]

He's had both, and they have not changed his attitude.

[Knife]

Meh, I've been critical of Shep before. Even joined in on my astonishment of his continued participation in these forums. But this time? I just don't see it as that big of a deal. Yeah, he trolled. That's a given. But its kind of a stretch to get DR6 to cover that blatently general knee jerk accusation of his. It didn't strike me as an actual intended claim.

I mean, hell, you could probably make a weak case for Einhander violating PR5 and DR2 in that same snippet in the HoS.

[SirNitram]

Meh, I've been critical of Shep before. Even joined in on my astonishment of his continued participation in these forums. But this time? I just don't see it as that big of a deal. Yeah, he trolled. That's a given. But its kind of a stretch to get DR6 to cover that blatently general knee jerk accusation of his. It didn't strike me as an actual intended claim.

I mean, hell, you could probably make a weak case for Einhander violating PR5 and DR2 in that same snippet in the HoS.

DR 6: He actively refused to provide evidence, claiming he didn't have to because someone else didn't do it. That's hardly a 'stretch'. That's 'I don't care about this rule, nyah!'

[Darth Wong]

Complete text of post over which this thread was created (posted in response to Pinochet's death):

now all we need is for COMRADE HUGO to join him, along with COMRADES FIDEL and RAUL.

And this is worthy of a Senate hearing ... how? That line was obviously just a throwaway joke line. If you're trying to prove Shep's contention that you're just hovering over him waiting for any flimsy excuse to go after him, you're doing a fine job.

[SirNitram]

Complete text of post over which this thread was created (posted in response to Pinochet's death):

now all we need is for COMRADE HUGO to join him, along with COMRADES FIDEL and RAUL.

And this is worthy of a Senate hearing ... how? That line was obviously just a throwaway joke line. If you're trying to prove Shep's contention that you're just hovering over him waiting for any flimsy excuse to go after him, you're doing a fine job.

I'd like to see some fucking evidence for that, or a retraction and apology.

You have about as much chance of THAT happening as Elfdart apologizing for his overblown claims and projections.

That being the part brought up, you know, where he specifically says he won't meet requests for evidence.

[Coyote]

I don't think that the comment about Chavez and Castro could really be taken seriously as a debate claim; I mean, it's clown shoes. Calling him on his bullshit, while legit, is adding a layer of seriousness to what is clearly meant to be mockery.

Shep's evasion, and attempting to hide behind Elfdart's behavior, was juvenile but given the circumstances I'd hardly call this bannable. Irritating, but not bannable.

If we start going for the throat on rule nitpickery every time someone we don't count among our favorites acts up, this will become a dark and forboding place.

[Ender]

(And of course, if Elfdart really does blow off DR 6 like claimed, I'd love links to such cases. I'd like a two-for-one.)

He usually provides links, but when he does its stuff like random blogs rather then actual valid sources, and they are usually in support of his strawman rather then what the person actually said. For some good examples, go look at the IvP threads we had this summer.

I'm with Coyote here - citing the fact that we have poor debaters here does not make it excusable for you to be one, and needs to be criticized as such. But a snap off comment like that is not worth a senate hearing.

Frankly, it looks to me like you are gunning for him - at this level you might as well start threatening people for saying "I like anal sex" because they are not providing evidence to support the fact that they enjoy anal sex. While I support taking a hard line against violating DR6, there are much more serious violations of it in several other threads on this board as we speak.

[The Yosemite Bear]

no comment

[Dalton]

no comment

Then why are you posting?

[Surlethe]

Generally, when we insult someone, it's an overblown claim like "crack-smoking donkeyfucker." Claims like that don't really need to be backed up, since they're very obviously over the top. When I read "Since everyones saying "good riddance", I decided to chime in with a death wish towards their FAVORITE people, Comrades HUGO and FIDEL", however, that didn't strike me as an over-the-top insulting flame; it contains the implicit claim that people here are communists -- more specifically, that their "favorite people" are Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. It's the sort of passive-aggressive thing I might pull if I thought everyone held some position, and I wanted to snipe away at them without having the balls to come out and debate it as a man. So, I asked for evidence.

Even at that point, Shep could've clarified and noted that it was an over-the-top claim or insult, and that he had no intention of actually asserting its truth (just as, if I'm flaming someone, and tack on, "... you dribbling ooze of cuntslime", and they said, "OMG EVIDENCE PLZ", I would say that I'm not actually claiming it's true; it's an insult). He did no such thing, and instead evaded the point. Of course, admitting that he'd posted a contentless flamebait is an admission of rule violation, but it's far less of a violation than tacitly admitting he's not going to provide evidence for a claim and simultaneously let it stand.

That was my thought process, anyway.

[Beowulf]

I think this is much ado about nothing. If you want to nail Shep, do it for something other than an obvious joke.

[Gil Hamilton]

If the best defense that people have for his behaviour in that thread is "He wasn't being serious, he was just trolling", then I'd think it still shouldn't bode well for him.

[Surlethe]

I think this is much ado about nothing. If you want to nail Shep, do it for something other than an obvious joke.

If he were just joking, he could have said so instead of claiming that Elfdart also does it, and there would have been eggs on my face.

[CmdrWilkens]

Honestly talking about Shep I just can't be neutral enough to make a good choice. On the one hand it is certainly childish and stupid of him to try and shift attention to Elf rather than just state it wasn't serious but yet what harm was there in the action. Yeah we're proabably a shit load mroe tolerant of him than we have any right to be though I just don't know if there is a level of punishment we could meet out that would rise to this occasion without being an over reaction. That, right now, I think is the bigger problem that he should be given a message to act more of an adult but I just don't see any immediately available remedy to accomplish that. Given that were someone to propose such a solution it deserves to be implemented.

[SirNitram]

Since the subject of my intent, and it's appearance has come up, I will be as straightforward as always:

Do I think Shep should be punished? Yes. I don't like established members flaunting the rules. I daresay we should expect more from folks who have been around for a while.

Do I think he should be banned, perm or otherwise? No. If I did, I likely would have mentioned it.

[Darth Wong]

If the best defense that people have for his behaviour in that thread is "He wasn't being serious, he was just trolling", then I'd think it still shouldn't bode well for him.

No, "just trolling" is when you post flamebait. Do you honestly think there are people out there who were outraged by that line? Who would be?

[Ender]

Since it seems more people take issue with his fingerpointing, perhaps we should dole out punishemt based off that.

How about the custom title "Elfdart Wannabe"?

[Gil Hamilton]

No, "just trolling" is when you post flamebait. Do you honestly think there are people out there who were outraged by that line? Who would be?

It was flamebait, just not very good flamebait. That line was clearly designed to get a rise out of people by implicitly calling the people in the thread communists and more directly by stating their favorite people were Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. Since both Darth Raptor and Surlethe ended up jumping on it and Shep started dancing around that, which is was Nitram is claiming is the rules violation, it worked a little. The first line in the linked thread isn't trolling, but the third post down is, particularly given Shep's posts afterwards.

[SirNitram]

Since it seems more people take issue with his fingerpointing, perhaps we should dole out punishemt based off that.

How about the custom title "Elfdart Wannabe"?

An amusing thing. Doesn't Elfdart still have 'Anti-Shep'? It'd be a nice matching pair of nuts.

[Coyote]

Actually, I do get a warm little giggle at that idea, Ender.

If Sir Nitram's comment is a "seconding", than I'm "thirding".

[CmdrWilkens]

Honestly its probably the best idea we've got so we should probably put it to a vote and see where the chips fall.

[The Yosemite Bear]

no comment

Then why are you posting?

Ok, to keep an eye on this, but more to the point, because of past history with said individual I am publically excusing myself from the debate. Alright!

I don't want to bring the whole Falk/Shep bullshit into this.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Actually, I do get a warm little giggle at that idea, Ender.

If Sir Nitram's comment is a "seconding", than I'm "thirding".

I'll be "fourthing" it. To the poll, I say!