[Admin Note] Rules Clarification [ad hominem attacks]

[SuperSleeper]

After much discussion, Apnea Board staff members have found it needful to further clarify our forum Rule #2, which prohibits the posting of material that is "abusive, disruptive, inappropriate, or harassing".  Specifically, we have added the following statement to Rule #2:

Ad hominem attacks against forum members are prohibited. (Definition: Ad hominem)

If you follow the link to our working definition for "ad hominem", it reads:

Ad hominem:

Adjective.  (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.  (source)

On Apnea Board, ad hominem attacks against forum members are prohibited.  When participating in the forums, please discuss the concepts, ideas and topics themselves, rather than attacking a forum member's person or character.

This ad-hominem rule is important because it clarifies the essence of what differentiates the culture on Apnea Board from other forums.  We expect everyone to communicate properly and act like adults;  we want this place to be free of the drama and petty interpersonal bickering that can sometimes infect a forum.

We try our best to adhere to a policy of "openness" as much as possible and not hinder free discussions unless a member crosses the line in violation of one of the forum rules.  Please note that Apnea Board is not a "free speech zone" where "anything goes".  Many of us consider this to be our "online home" and we expect folks to behave properly, as if they were a guest in our own home.  We have community standards that are outlined in our forum rules.  Those rules & polices have been carefully discussed &  developed by our forum staff & Advisory Members-- we expect everyone to abide by them.

As Apnea Board Administrator, I also remind folks that if you're reading or participating on threads located in the Off Topic Forum, you may wish to read this post about what is allowed in that forum.  If you don't want to read controversial posts or threads that can sometimes be offensive or objectionable to you, I suggest you do not read anything in the Off Topic Forum.  The reason that forum exists is to provide a "relief valve" for our members to discuss issues or off-topic "chit chat" that is outside the scope of sleep apnea or CPAP topics.

Please note the following paragraph from that "sticky post", regarding Off Topic discussions:

Off-topic threads or posts from other forums may be moved here as necessary. Keep in mind that religious and political discussion (while allowed in this forum), can get over-heated, so you might want to wear asbestos clothing when reading or replying in one of those threads. If someone starts to make you angry, just leave the Off-Topic forum for a while. If someone is extremely annoying to you, you can always put them on your ignore list (available from your User Control Panel (User CP at the top left of the forums), so that you won't see their posts when you log in.

So, if someone in the Off Topic Forum is violating a forum rule or participating in an ad hominem attack against another forum member, by all means use the "Report" button at the bottom of their post, or contact a staff member to report the violation, and let them know which specific rule has been violated.  HOWEVER in the Off Topic Forum, if someone is simply being controversial, offensive or objectionable to your own particular viewpoint, I would simply suggest that you either 1) stop reading threads in the Off Topic Forum, or 2) put that particular forum member on your "ignore list".

Thanks for listening, and if you have any questions about these rules or policies, feel free to reply here in this thread and we'll try our best to answer.

[Stom]

Thank you for keeping this a nice place.

[sheepless]

yes, thanks.

I know certain opinions will raise my blood pressure & it can be hard not to escalate tensions by responding so your suggestion to avoid those topics is working for me.

after unsuccesfully requesting political subjects be addressed by moderators about 2 months ago, I quit reading anything related to covid 19 or having a title suggesting a political topic.

kind of a shame with respect to covid 19 because I might have missed something important, but even that topic strayed early into the political.

I enjoy some non political off topic threads but the only reason I've hung around here for 3 years is for the topics of apnea, cpap & sleep.

I was and am not interested in the kind of conspiracy theories, petty arguments & name calling etc that seem to be inevitable online (I assume ad hominem attacks fit the bill.)

part of me would prefer prohibiting political speech altogether on a forum like this but I also fully appreciate your interest in maintaining a relatively open forum while moderating against personal insults or attacks. makes sense.

[Sleeprider]

Sheepless, good post. What we're saying is that there remains room for political discussion in the off-topic forum, but when arguing any issue, the line is drawn where comments are an attack on the person, rahter than the issue. An argument on any issue cannot disqualify or insult the person that made the comment in question for any reason, instead we want an argument to focus in the issue or comment that is disagreed with. This is not a topic exclusion, but is a prohibition of personal attacks against someone a commente one s disagrees with.

[mesenteria]

We can disagree with one another on matters of fact, principles, virtues, ethics, morality, and politics.  It's just not right, or acceptable here, to be disagreeable.

To illustrate:  I may or may not be stupid.  I can be proven wrong with countering facts or references that show my thinking to be muddled.  You won't be very convincing to me, the stupid person, if you call me stupid.  If you show me that my facts are wrong, I might just change my position. Slowly, because I'm stupid.  If I'm of average intelligence, I'll be faster about it.  I still won't like being called stupid. 

Ad Hominem (Latin for, "to the man") is a fallacy of relevance.   The utterer of a falsehood or poorly constructed rationale is not relevant to what is being debated.  Instead, it is the facts and premises of his argument that are relevant, and only they should be addressed when it comes to the debate over the matter.

Wise counsel stated earlier:  when you are not going to prevail and win your case, it is wisest to leave for a while, even if just to gather more information or to more carefully consider the opposite viewpoints.  There's that old expression, "Sleep on it."  Far better to withdraw than to blow a gasket and spray invective, vituperation, and gall all over your record, because that's what we'll all remember. 

[SuperSleeper]

Far better to withdraw than to blow a gasket and spray invective, vituperation, and gall all over your record, because that's what we'll all remember. 

vituperation - had to look that one up: 

noun: vituperation - bitter and abusive language.

[SarcasticDave94]

Since this is the Apnea Board, advocating "Sleep on it" seems to fit I suppose.

[mesenteria]

This is worth at least one bump over the time it has been posted.