Discussion in 'Infraction Review' started by ori, Aug 26, 2019.
Moutwash is apealing a warning:
Mouthwash consents to publication including his messages and forwarded this conversation:
And Arakhor has this to add:
It's a post worthy of consideration for a two-point infraction, but I wouldn't have immediately jumped to "conspiracy theory" straight away. The whole thread is not that great, though Mouthwash didn't get a massive response to this post.
I'm on the fence to be honest, but as I'm not convinced that a two-point infraction is the right way forward, I'll vote to overturn.
As was said in another of these reviews, we cannot be the arbiters of truth, we can only attempt to keep threads on topic and maintain civility. In reading the thread in question, the issue for me is whether Mouthwash posted this to intentionally inflame or derail the thread? In thread, Mouthwash was taken to task and the topic of his post proven to be what it was, isn't that part of having a discussion?
Other posters certainly posted things in the same thread that were inflammatory and took the thread off topic and received nothing for doing so. I am inclined to overturn the infraction.
I also agree with overturning the warning - I don't see it as quite rising to anything really disruptive or sufficiently trollish to warrant action. It is a sort of conspiracy theory but that alone wouldn't do it for me. That it is feeding on racial stereotypes about "root causes" of poverty might be a point against it, but I am not convinced that it crosses over a banned racist posting line.
I'll close this thread, inform everyone about the outcome and publish tonight.
I'm a little late, but my view is that if the post were a deliberate attempt to provoke negative reactions, it would be worth an infraction for that reason (in the same way a "the moon is made of cheese" comment in a discussion between serious astronomers would be trolling). It's easy to see how the post could fall into that category. But the infraction assumes misguided sincerity and instead punishes the post for expressing an inappropriate view. I don't agree it falls into that category. Expressions of opinion about political parties have to be a lot more insulting in a non-RD thread to attract a sanction. I would vote to overturn as well.
I now informed everyone and am publishing the thread as is.
Separate names with a comma.