Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1
However, it is difficult in practice to distinguish between lying and just being wrong--and there are plenty of rules about how to deal with posters who are wrong.
|
Yes, it is difficult. That's why I think that it is better to just make a rule that holds people responsible of their sayings instead of making a rule about dishonesty. It is usually relatively easy to handle the situation with probing questions when you know that the other person has to answer your questions (or be punished of not answering).
Which rules apply to a person who is wrong and is not an ATM proponent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1
Plus, we have rule 14 (Disruptive Behavior): "The moderators and administrators reserve the right to take action against a poster who is disrupting the normal flow of the board. This includes violations listed in the other rules (trolling, use of ad hominems, posting copyrighted materials, etc.), but may also include behavior we have not yet foreseen." I can't imagine a moderator ever proving that a poster was lying (as opposed to just being wrong), but I'm pretty sure that if they ever did, that that would fall under the general category of disruptive behavior.  |
Well, some worst situations might be able to be handled with some existing rules, rule 2 might be applied to some situations, and rule 9 might very roughly fit to some situations, but I still don't see reasons not to extend rule 13 (or at least parts of it) to cover everybody, in which case we would be able to cover all these situations without a need to ponder which rule, if any, fits to certain situation.
Thing about rule 14 is that I don't know what it covers when I'm thinking of reporting some post.