r2i forum

I think this sentence "urinated on statues of gods in the "pooja room", maybe be hurtful.

It is in post number 59

http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/showthread.php/25959-Mastan-Bhai-is-drunk?p=420490#post420490

atheist or not our forum shouldnt hurt the sentiments of others. I really dont want to argue this so I suggest other senior members dont make it a religious vs non religious discussion...either it violates COC or not, IMHO it does. personally its a red card offense.

RK

----------------------
admin note:

Members are required to read this thread and review poll results before participate in this poll.

MEMBER input required on COC regarding religious posts

rajradio;420511I think this sentence "urinated on statues of gods in the "pooja room", maybe be hurtful.

It is in post number 59

http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/showthread.php/25959-Mastan-Bhai-is-drunk?p=420490#post420490

atheist or not our forum shouldnt hurt the sentiments of others. I really dont want to argue this so I suggest other senior members dont make it a religious vs non religious discussion...either it violates COC or not, IMHO it does. personally its a red card offense.

RK

RK, Which CoC does it violate?
PS: I remember one mallu movie with kinda similar act in the end and caused an uproar.

VS007;420530RK, Which CoC does it violate?
PS: I remember one mallu movie with kinda similar act in the end and caused an uproar.

I remember some other malayalam movies of Shakeela too which can't be described here. Donot know why the ref of movies here?. any justification to a blatantly offensive posts?.

VS007;420530RK, Which CoC does it violate?
...

Most probably that post does not violate any CoC, and gets to be stay in forum for the same reason as this post gets to stay.

RBee;420707You asked RK to discard them if he feels so and then bring it to CnV saying you were surprised that he did so.

Why surprise that member took your offer :) ?

As the first step I spoke to the member directly instead of bringing to CnV. In my first post I said allegations without proofs are defamatory. And he responded thus
[quote]
I have proof for every statement I made.....since I have proof I will not agree to the word defamatory. If your accusation of defamation is not founded so I shall completely reject this theory of yours.
[/quote]
What do you expect me to do in such a situation? My attempt to directly resolve with the person had failed. Not only that. My request was my own theory and was completely rejected by the other person. So, I decided to simmer down with the member instead of escalating it and to bring it to third party attention. What would you have done differently? Or, what do you expect me to do? To take on the member directly and drag it on?

Admin2;420565Rajradio,

Thanks for bringing that post to our attention. At present TAT is evaluating if the post violates any COC.

If it doesn't violate CoC, I would be curious to know if CoC can be strengthened to cover patterns in those type of posts including the usage of certain words like "b*" as CoC violations.

rajradio;420511I think this sentence "urinated on statues of gods in the "pooja room", maybe be hurtful.

It is in post number 59

http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/showthread.php/25959-Mastan-Bhai-is-drunk?p=420490#post420490

atheist or not our forum shouldnt hurt the sentiments of others. I really dont want to argue this so I suggest other senior members dont make it a religious vs non religious discussion...either it violates COC or not, IMHO it does. personally its a red card offense.

RK

RK
It should be hurtful to the poster himself. If Mastan bhai thinks it's a cool act to call his mother a bitch or to piss in the house other than the toilets only goes to show the immaturity.

MB has announced he does not care for COC, but members and admins do. I stay away from that thread coz it neither brings any knowledge nor any laughs. Worthless to even pass the time in that thread.

Hyd

rajradio;420511I think this sentence "urinated on statues of gods in the "pooja room", maybe be hurtful.

It is in post number 59

http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/showthread.php/25959-Mastan-Bhai-is-drunk?p=420490#post420490

atheist or not our forum shouldnt hurt the sentiments of others. I really dont want to argue this so I suggest other senior members dont make it a religious vs non religious discussion...either it violates COC or not, IMHO it does. personally its a red card offense.

RK

The post has been deemed as not violating the COC.

Some background: It does not violate our documented COC. We have allowed posts in the past that have called Ganesh as an elephant God, Muhammed as a pedophile, circumcision on trains (making joke of an Islamic practice), banning of Koran, attacks on Mahatma Gandhi, etc etc.

There will always be some posts that will hurt the sentiment of one or the other member and that is for members to figure out how to handle and deal with. This forum will engage in minimal censorship other than personal attacks on members, profanity, pornographic links and material, solicitations and spam, commercials, posts stating seriously grieveous harm to someone, etc and this has been our practice so far and shall continue.

If it doesn't violate documented CoC, then I suggest an amendment to cover such use cases. This is just setting a bad precedence. Members can isolate themselves in their own threads, use whatever words and phrases they want in the name of hurting themselves and get away with it.

Rajram;420768If it doesn't violate documented CoC, then I suggest an amendment to cover such use cases. This is just setting a bad precedence. Members can isolate themselves in their own threads, use whatever words and phrases they want in the name of hurting themselves and get away with it.

We thank you for the suggestion. The member cannot isolate in his/her own thread and continue on with a repetitive and a sustained attack (within short time frames) even on some non protected species. If in the judgement of admin the attack is egregious (sustained and repetitive), offensive and inflammatory, admin will take action. Admin will err on the side of allowing freedom.

Imposing our own morality and censorship would perhaps be a wrong approach. The reason we censor some of what we censor so far is not to impose our morality but to protect the potentially younger readers (minors, albeit very very few) of our forum to whom we have a responsibility and an obligation. And the one person we have unwaveringly protected from attacks is the member of R2I forum and only for one simple reason of having meaningful debates that are conducive to their own survival, which is a necessity for the forum surivival.