Skip to main content

37 Messages

 • 

646 Points

Sun, Mar 24, 2019 9:45 PM

Closed

Abuse in idea conversation

In the thread titled Gender Ratings Up Front in Movies, I believe the poster Ed Jones (XLIX) has repeatedly violated the sites Terms of Service Section 4 Code of Conduct

4.1 Get Satisfaction Service that it determines in its sole discretion to be in violation of these Terms of Service, to be unlawful, offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene or otherwise objectionable
 4.2.1 Abuse, harassment, threats, flaming or intimidation of any person or organization.
4.2.3 Use of derogatory, discriminatory or excessively graphic language.

The user identified has used language to describe me as mentally deficient, and has actually directly described me as being defective...



His posts continue to use language to attack me personally as a means of making his point seem stronger.

Can you help me to have a more civil discussion please?

Responses

6.2K Messages

 • 

153.1K Points

2 years ago

Hi, Brett William C. It won't happen again. I would be interested in seeing the other side of the story, though. Would you be willing to forgive this person if he apologized and stopped replying to your idea topics altogether?

37 Messages

 • 

646 Points

Hi Jeorj. Ed makes some valid points and I see below has apologized for the inappropriate comments. If I said anything which he considered overly inflammatory I would like to know so I could moderate my own behaviour better in future discussions. If the inappropriate behaviour ends and is not repeated directly or by proxy I would consider the matter settled. :)

6.2K Messages

 • 

153.1K Points

We all have our reputations, so some events are unsurprising. Hopefully a year from now, those of us who have a tendency to use piercing words on or about fellow participants of the forum will be broken of the habit, so as to have a less toxic environment. I try to avoid criticizing anything that is not worth anybody's investment. There are so many more important things to address. Regardless, putdowns are to be understood to be off-topic around here. If we get into libel territory, then we are crossing the line.

37 Messages

 • 

646 Points

Hey Ed. Yes, on reflection I can see some of my comments were casting doubt on the motivations of fellow posters and for that I apologize. For the record I don't see the individuals voring as being automatically biased, but rather the system for delivering the weighted average as skewed by the sheer numbers of females and males (so identified) who are voting. It would be a wild generalisation to say all men/so.en like the same thing in entertainment but I do see value in adjusting the system to deliver both the overall score and the gender specific average. If that makes the system look bad because of the discrepancies maybe that is something for IMDB to consider. But regardless I am going to be seeing JOHN WICK 3 no matter what anyone else rates it ;)

37 Messages

 • 

646 Points

As long as discuss the issues and not each other I think we should be. But God help the guy we BOTH disagree with