Policy on the use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc.:

[segep soch]

That was confusing. I clicked on one thread and it opened another one....I must have done it right after you merged the threads.

[muspell]

Originally Posted by Meridious

ROFL

If I had a dime for every time certain poster said things to me like: Wow, I didn't know you had no respect for our constitution" or "Well, unlike you, I care about the troops" or "Nice to see you don't care about the troops" or "Oh, so you don't care about the troops"


etc etc etc

Right.. And that's usually the point, as well. Either that kind of thing is fine, or it's not, regardless. And noone's really asking any mods to make a judgement on when it's fine or when it's not. Instead of more like suggesting they just shouldn't.. at all.

[timj219]

Originally Posted by Sal Munella

"homophobe" - that's another one the Lefties like to attack people with

I'm afraid that one will not qualify as an "indefensible statement".

From the online "free dictionary"
ho·mo·pho·bi·a
n.
1. Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
2. Behavior based on such a feeling.

You have posted the following
"Namecalling, personal attack. It's all that the Homosexual Lobby has. And it's why the Homosexual Lobby has lost the argument nationally, as proven by the fact that the overwhelming majority of States how now amended their Constitutions so as to block the Homosexual Lobby from redefining marriage or imposing its morally degenerate will upon the majority." (bold mine)

That post expresses contempt for homosexuals. You are therefore a homophobe and to call you such is not "indefensible"

[Crystal]

Originally Posted by muspell

So remind me again.. why do we have a rule against the word "liar"?

"Liar", "lie", "lying" or similar expressions have become a popular means of baiting recently. The Moderators have received a lot of complaints about that. Until now, the use of those terms wasn't regarded as a violation of the forum rules. However, we have come to the conclusion, that this policy has encouraged some posters to use these terms as a loophole for baiting. Unfortunately, for the moderators it is impossible to decide in each case we see whether the calling of someone a liar is being raised as a real belief or is being used abusively. So from now on, the accusation of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. So please do not call another poster a liar from now on. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" seem to be absolutely sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

[Meridious]

And I am totally blunt and up front when I say that I don't think someone cares about servicemen whatsoever unless it fits their propaganda.

/shrug

I don't use "so, you must not care for the troops" or "I see, so the constitution means nothing to you" or "you must be against [insert freedom here].." casually, and never have, as the wounded poster does on a regular basis...if I say something like that, I will make an argument for it, and will mean every word of it.

And if it fits the content of either the thread itself, or the poster's comments. It is quite relevant to point out complete hypocrisy of the person you are arguing if it fits the comments of the poster or the thread.

So, if I say I do not believe [insert name here] cares in general about the well-being of [insert subject here] or that the poster believes in [insert freedom here] then it will not only be relevant, but it will have an argument behind it.

Unlike posters who use those statements anytime they run out of points and wish to turn it personal.

How many times has Sam or others said that so and so "must not be Christian" or "can't believe in God" or " you don't believe in the constitution? Almost daily, I'd wager.

So the first time someone says the same about her, regarding one point, (and in a much better formed and understandable sentence/paragraph, I might add), we end up with threads about how Sam is being wounded unfairly.

It is junk.

In my opinion, Sam is the LAST person who has ANY legitimacy when it comes to "So and so said I don't care about the troops, so lets change the rules."

It actually makes my stomach turn a little to think about it. It is just yucky.

[ViolaLee]

Originally Posted by Crystal

Sam, what is sneaky or fake about a response such as "I do respect the military and this is how - [fill in the blank with examples of how you respect the military].

Nothing, that's not what I was referring to. See the quote in my post about sneaky and fake.

[Crystal]

Originally Posted by Samantha

Nothing, that's not what I was referring to. See the quote in my post about sneaky and fake.

Then why can't you respond in a similar way as the example? There are ways to respond to a false accusation without saying "You're a liar".

[ViolaLee]

I can say you are lying, but not you are a liar?

[proUSA]

This is just too humorous.

[Native American]

Originally Posted by Samantha

I can say you are lying, but not you are a liar?

See, here's the deal:

Jefe can call posters "trolls" and "chickens", and the pro-homosexual crowd can call posters "homophobes", and that's perfectly OK.

So just call posters "truthophobes" or "lie-telling trolls" or "lie-telling chickens", and The Management won't be upset.

[timj219]

Originally Posted by Sal Munella

See, here's the deal:

Jefe can call posters "trolls" and "chickens", and the pro-homosexual crowd can call posters "homophobes", and that's perfectly OK.

So just call posters "truthophobes" or "lie-telling trolls" or "lie-telling chickens", and The Management won't be upset.

From the online "free dictionary"
ho·mo·pho·bi·a
n.
1. Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
2. Behavior based on such a feeling.

You have posted the following
"Namecalling, personal attack. It's all that the Homosexual Lobby has. And it's why the Homosexual Lobby has lost the argument nationally, as proven by the fact that the overwhelming majority of States how now amended their Constitutions so as to block the Homosexual Lobby from redefining marriage or imposing its morally degenerate will upon the majority." (bold mine)

That post expresses contempt for homosexuals. You are therefore a homophobe and to call you such is not "indefensible"

[ViolaLee]

It's absurd really.

Liar = someone who tells lies
lies = not the truth.

You are allowed to say you are not telling the truth. But you are not allowed to say you are lying?

Or is it just that you are not allowed to say a person is a liar, when you catch them lying?

I just want to be clear so I don't get points. Are you allowed to say:

You are lying.

?

[Crystal]

Originally Posted by Samantha

I can say you are lying, but not you are a liar?

"Liar", "lie", "lying" or similar expressions have become a popular means of baiting recently. The Moderators have received a lot of complaints about that. Until now, the use of those terms wasn't regarded as a violation of the forum rules. However, we have come to the conclusion, that this policy has encouraged some posters to use these terms as a loophole for baiting. Unfortunately, for the moderators it is impossible to decide in each case we see whether the calling of someone a liar is being raised as a real belief or is being used abusively. So from now on, the accusation of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. So please do not call another poster a liar from now on. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" seem to be absolutely sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

The absolute BEST advice I can give to anyone is to stop with "You are a...." type statements. It's simple really. When a person uses those phrases it puts a person on the defensive and communication begins to break down. Use "I" statements - "I see things this way...", "That's not how I recall it.", "Let me see if I understand." I would say that no one should say "You are a liar" or "You are lying" because those are "YOU" statements.

[Crystal]

Originally Posted by Samantha

It's absurd really.

Liar = someone who tells lies
lies = not the truth.

You are allowed to say you are not telling the truth. But you are not allowed to say you are lying?

Or is it just that you are not allowed to say a person is a liar, when you catch them lying?

I just want to be clear so I don't get points. Are you allowed to say:

You are lying.

?

No, do not say "You are lying" because in truth you don't know if they are lying or not. Perhaps they are just misinformed.

[Malvolio]

Originally Posted by Samantha

Are you allowed to say:

You are lying.

?

No, you are not.

Why do I feel that I am wasting my time here.