Describing another member as lying

[Assyriankey]

Hi all, during the last month or so there have been several instances where one member says that another member is lying.

After some debate amongst the moderators and staff of this forum we have decided that the statement "You are lying." (and similar derivatives) is 100% equivalent with calling that member a liar and this means that saying that a member is lying breaks our rule #6 - No insults.

Rephrased:  do not describe another member as lying or you will be moderated for breaking our rule #6.

[catwixen]

Soooo if they are lying? Tough luck?
What if they say...Obama is a girl, can we call them a liar then?

[Assyriankey]

You are not allowed to call someone a liar even if they are lying.

[rakhel]

interesting to see how this will play out.......


You just have to make it that much harder, don't you?

[Vynn]

I don't feel right about this. When a member lies, especially about what another member has said, and you can prove that they've lied, this rule lets them off scott free. Why, what's to keep some members from lying their ass off about what you've previously said? When somebody claims you've said something that you've not said, calling them a liar lets them and any other readers of the thread know that you're watching what's being said about you.

An example:

Member A:  I don't think rapists should get off scott free.

Member B: Member A wants rapists to get the death penalty and i don't see how he can say that.

Member A: Well, i'd call you a liar, since i didn't say that, but it's against the rules. I guess i'll just reply that Member B IS a rapist. After all, i can't be called out on lying, because it's against the rules.

[catwixen]

It's getting a bit to watered down and nice in here......

[Vynn]

It's getting a bit to watered down and nice in here......

Catwixen eats poo.         (You can't say i'm lying, cat! Now do me!)

[Assyriankey]

I don't feel right about this. When a member lies, especially about what another member has said, and you can prove that they've lied, this rule lets them off scott free. Why, what's to keep some members from lying their ass off about what you've previously said? When somebody claims you've said something that you've not said, calling them a liar lets them and any other readers of the thread know that you're watching what's being said about you.

An example:

Member A:  I don't think rapists should get off scott free.

Member B: Member A wants rapists to get the death penalty and i don't see how he can say that.

Member A: Well, i'd call you a liar, since i didn't say that, but it's against the rules. I guess i'll just reply that Member B IS a rapist. After all, i can't be called out on lying, because it's against the rules.

Where is member B's intent to deceive?  Why can't you just describe member B as being in error (i.e wrong) or, as I have done once or twice, describe member B as having the comprehension skill of a jellyfish?

[rakhel]

Where is member B's intent to deceive?  Why can't you just describe member B as being in error (i.e wrong) or, as I have done once or twice, describe member B as having the comprehension skill of a jellyfish?

so insulting someone in a subtle way is ok

[Assyriankey]

It's getting a bit to watered down and nice in here......

We (the staff) are not adopting this position in an attempt to further enforce our notions of good forum behaviour on our members - we are doing it because it is the correct interpretation of our rules.  If we want to be allowed to describe someone as lying then we need to change rule #6.

[Assyriankey]

Where is member B's intent to deceive?  Why can't you just describe member B as being in error (i.e wrong) or, as I have done once or twice, describe member B as having the comprehension skill of a jellyfish?

so insulting someone in a subtle way is ok

Of course it is.

6.  No Insults.  Do not personally insult other members.  Posting "Your comment is dumb/stupid/idiotic/etc because [reason]" is allowed but posting "You are dumb/stupid/idiotic/etc" is not - regardless of the reason.

[rakhel]

  okay......

[Fit2BThaied]

Okay, I will no longer tell them they are lying, or that they are a liar.
                Can we say:
"I am convinced that that is not true"
"What you have just stated is unbelievable and incredible, resembling something that an untruthful person might say."
"No, you are not telling the truth."
"Actually, the evidence shows you did not tell the truth."
"Your mother consumed bovine excrement, and that is how she made you."

[catwixen]

LOL ^

Change rule #6 Assy, strong/insulting debate makes for a more interesting forum.  

Vynn fabricates fecal matter.....
Oh and he deceives on a regular basis.  

[Assyriankey]

"I am convinced that that is not true"
"What you have just stated is unbelievable and incredible, resembling something that an untruthful person might say."
"No, you are not telling the truth."
"Actually, the evidence shows you did not tell the truth."
"Your mother consumed bovine excrement, and that is how she made you."

I think all of those are okay but I'm not a moderator.  "In war truth is so precious that she must always be accompanied by a vanguard of lies."

[Assyriankey]

Cat, go f*ck yourself.

[catwixen]

Hey I am simply the voice of dissent...don't shoot the protester.... ||rolleyes||

[Assyriankey]

Hey I am simply the voice of dissent...don't shoot the protester.... ||rolleyes||

[SkunkButt]

Tell me lies
Tell me lies
Tell me sweet little lies.

Fleetwood Mac

Stevie Nicks was awesome and that is no lie.   

[catwixen]

^ White witches are usually awesome. 

[CosmicScherzo]

How about, "If a liar were currently busy lying about the thing you were talking about, they would say exactly what you just said, since your statement is identical to the lie of that lying liar."? 

Does that work?

[Assyriankey]

How about, "If a liar were currently busy lying about the thing you were talking about, they would say exactly what you just said, since your statement is identical to the lie of that lying liar."? 

Does that work?

I think that's okay too :)

[Happy Evolute]

Can we say:

"I am convinced that that is not true"

Yes.

"What you have just stated is unbelievable and incredible, resembling something that an untruthful person might say."

Yes.

"No, you are not telling the truth."

Yes.

"Actually, the evidence shows you did not tell the truth."

Yes.

"Your mother consumed bovine excrement, and that is how she made you."

Could be considered insulting, if not obviously in jest.

[Happy Evolute]

How about, "If a liar were currently busy lying about the thing you were talking about, they would say exactly what you just said, since your statement is identical to the lie of that lying liar."? 

Does that work?

Yes, and +1.

See?  Having rules inspires creative thought!

[hideousmonster]

I like this rule. Mainly because I don't ever accuse anybody of lying, yet I get called a liar or told that I'm lying often, when I believe that I'm being as technically honest as I can.

[sky]

I think the rule to not allow people to call each other "liars" is a good one. I don't automatically call people a liar. I would probably say something like.."that's not correct". Then I could prove them wrong for what they said.

Can we tell someone they are being "dishonest"?

[hideousmonster]

I think the rule to not allow people to call each other "liars" is a good one. I don't automatically call people a liar. I would probably say something like.."that's not correct". Then I could prove them wrong for what they said.

Can we tell someone they are being "dishonest"?

I find that just as insulting. "I disagree" is the closest thing to that that you'll get out of me. Occassionally, I'll reply to something with a, "then how do you explain this..." comment. That doesn't necessarily expose a lie, but in fact gives someone an opportunity to explain their own opinion of something which some may consider in conflict with a claim.

[Cricket]

Stupid rule.   

[hideousmonster]

I must clarify, though... when I say "I like this rule," what I mean is, I like the interpretation of a lie accusation as being an insult... I don't like the anti-insult rule. I think insults should all be allowed. Insults indicate insecurities and irrational thinking. While that may not be productive to a conversation, it at least makes it more clear from the beginning that the person to whom your talking is only interested in preaching their own beliefs, and belittling those who disagree with them.  To me, knowing that makes it easier to assess the value of a conversation early on. Will the conversation be insightful, annoying, or will I just have lots of fun pressing somebody's buttons by acting more civil than they, listening carefully to their insults, and continuing to disagree? The freedom to insult makes it much easier to predict what you will get out of the conversation.

[Happy Evolute]

I think insults should all be allowed.

Try this forum.