But people DID have a beef with those buffoon posts. And by the way, it was a third party that reported that post first! I do want to emphasize that it's not a requirement that a post has to be reported for it to receive a warning/infraction. However, that's how it generally works. We can't read every post in every thread and, more often than not, we respond to reported posts. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but why is it too much to ask NOT to insult someone?
Yes you are doing just that.
Wasn't talking about the buffoon issue itbt, don't even know what it's about. More times Burgey/sledger get infracted the better imo.
A passionate discussion can't take place without insults? I've participated in plenty of debates without having to resort to name calling.
It's harder than you think when you yourself have just implied that your being a 'jerk' for your post. Which is clearly pejorative. I won't be so petty to suggest that you should be infracted, but if people act like prats in the real world, they would expect to be called out on it. I think a certain level should be expected. Calling someone a 'buffoon' isn't nice, but it's hardly something that I would call a major insult. What if I called someone 'haughty', 'obtuse', 'overblown' - good god, the list is endless. They're all negative words, but they're hardly insults if the description is warranted.
Yes, but you are letting snide, sarcastic remarks pass - or letting someone's blind lack of understanding cause arguments by just infracting the side who throws a pretty low-grade insult. Good god, if Richard were posting some of his arguments about Ireland being English etc. I wouldn't last 5 minutes without getting banned. In fact, this discussion is doing my head in. If you don't get why people are disgruntled (and if everything was hunky-dory what reason do I have to complain, given I have not been infracted) then you need to just have another read through of some of the threads that have led to infractions.
You must be kidding mate? If someone just keeps repeating ****, directed at you ont he forum, and you try to reason with that person but they keep carrying on, you suggest we just go around in perpeuity, with them doing that?
Well said.
All I'm saying is that it's fine to have a heated debate. You can do so without resorting to insults. I hate to be a broken record, but if it gets to a point where the other party has pushed you over the edge -then report the post. I can assure you Burgey that we won't gloss over the reported post and let someone slide because of what country they support. You have my word on that, if that means anything.
I don't think you will either. But if people can't cop being called a bloody buffoon, they belong in a creche, not on a cricket forum. Or a forum of any kind, frankly.
Can it, troll.
Can't speak for everyone else but my issue is that the rules are unclear and arbitrarily enforced, not that there are too many infractions. If anything I'm surprised at the lack of infractions given the allegedly 'more strict' rules stated in the first post of this thread. Though, tbf, if they were enforced as stated in that post I would think there were too many infractions.
(noracist)