An e-mail to admin concerning "Herod"

[Joaz Banbeck]

I recall a Heinlein comment ( which google cannot find for me ) about judging the intentions of aliens. He said something to the effect that anyone who belived that you could understand what an alien wanted should go sit in on a messy divorce trial between two humans. The implication was that even two people who had lived together for years could substantially misunderstand each other's motivations.

[deja]

I recall a Heinlein comment ( which google cannot find for me ) about judging the intentions of aliens. He said something to the effect that anyone who belived that you could understand what an alien wanted should go sit in on a messy divorce trial between two humans. The implication was that even two people who had lived together for years could substantially misunderstand each other's motivations.

You've misunderstood my point, Joaz. I'm not at all suggesting that we never "misunderstand each other's motivations." Of course we misunderstand intentions and motivations. But there's no need to have a direct line into one's subjective states to have a reasonable understanding of where people are coming from, i.e., their intentions, motivations, etc. If we didn't have this basic competency, we couldn't communicate or even understand our own actions. A misunderstanding is itself predicated on the supposition of a mutual understanding on some level, which is why it's nonsensical to say the spider (or Alien) sitting on my lap misunderstands my desire for it to be located somewhere other than my lap.

So the retort that because we can never perfectly know anyone's intentions or motivations, we therefore can never know anything about an individual's motivations or intentions is a non-starter.

[Pippen]

I did also get banned now for "sexist comments". Here is what happened: YellowBell played breakfast and looked pretty good in the middle of the game, so I commented with 2-3 phrases like "wow, girls are not supposed to think that well^^". So as you see I did mark my sentence as "not that serious meant".... It's just another proof that KGS admins overdo it. But I can see where they coming from to prevent talk into getting trivial and vulgar, and hell, if they want a clean and aseptic community chat - I guess they are entitled to.

[daal]

I did also get banned now for "sexist comments". Here is what happened: YellowBell played breakfast and looked pretty good in the middle of the game, so I commented with 2-3 phrases like "wow, girls are not supposed to think that well^^". So as you see I did mark my sentence as "not that serious meant"

Jokes that require emoticons are probably not funny in the first place. Sounds like a reasonable ban to me.

[Pippen]

I did also get banned now for "sexist comments". Here is what happened: YellowBell played breakfast and looked pretty good in the middle of the game, so I commented with 2-3 phrases like "wow, girls are not supposed to think that well^^". So as you see I did mark my sentence as "not that serious meant"

Jokes that require emoticons are probably not funny in the first place. Sounds like a reasonable ban to me.

Let's use the word "KGS-reasonable" for otherwise it could be confusing.

[Boidhre]

I did also get banned now for "sexist comments". Here is what happened: YellowBell played breakfast and looked pretty good in the middle of the game, so I commented with 2-3 phrases like "wow, girls are not supposed to think that well^^". So as you see I did mark my sentence as "not that serious meant"

Jokes that require emoticons are probably not funny in the first place. Sounds like a reasonable ban to me.

Let's use the word "KGS-reasonable" for otherwise it could be confusing.

When you use any forum or service online you have to play by their rules. Whether you personally agree with them or not is immaterial really. You are always free to not use the service after all if you don't like the rules very much.

[Pippen]

When you use any forum or service online you have to play by their rules. Whether you personally agree with them or not is immaterial really. You are always free to not use the service after all if you don't like the rules very much.

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

[jts]

When you use any forum or service online you have to play by their rules. Whether you personally agree with them or not is immaterial really. You are always free to not use the service after all if you don't like the rules very much.

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

So, try to imagine you have a daughter. And she's playing go at a tournament. And someone is standing behind her, watching. And he says, "Wow, girls are not supposed to think that well." Then he sniggers to make sure everyone understands it's a joke.

I also think the KGS mods are too capricious, and your ban probably had more to do with personalities than principles, but you need to understand that you don't deserve a ton of sympathy.

[Bonobo]

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

You don’t seem to get the point that calling women “girls” is sexist, no matter how funny you believe your remarks to be.

Apparently I’ve been a bit too quick, too judicial—as Uberdude writes, the person on question actually is a girl.

I apologize.

Greetings, Tom

[skydyr]

When you use any forum or service online you have to play by their rules. Whether you personally agree with them or not is immaterial really. You are always free to not use the service after all if you don't like the rules very much.

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

So, try to imagine you have a daughter. And she's playing go at a tournament. And someone is standing behind her, watching. And he says, "Wow, girls are not supposed to think that well." Then he sniggers to make sure everyone understands it's a joke.

I also think the KGS mods are too capricious, and your ban probably had more to do with personalities than principles, but you need to understand that you don't deserve a ton of sympathy.

Depending on the relationship between the people involved and the other people around, the comment can be completely appropriate as gentle ribbing or a humorous compliment, or it can be quite inappropriate. It is of course difficult for an admin to tell which is which without prior knowledge of the parties involved, so I'm not surprised to hear that they would err on the side of caution, especially since other observers wouldn't necessarily take it in the correct context either.

[Boidhre]

Depending on the relationship between the people involved and the other people around, the comment can be completely appropriate as gentle ribbing or a humorous compliment, or it can be quite inappropriate. It is of course difficult for an admin to tell which is which without prior knowledge of the parties involved, so I'm not surprised to hear that they would err on the side of caution, especially since other observers wouldn't necessarily take it in the correct context either.

But that's the thing. It's a public go server not a small club where everyone knows each other and knows what can and cannot be said.

[peppernut]

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

The two aren't mutually exclusive you know. I am trying to think of a situation where telling a woman "you play well for a girl" would be okay if only you smiled when you said it, but I'm not coming up with anything.

[Uberdude]

I didn't read anything about jokes not allowed (actually it wasn't a joke, it was more a humorous remark).

You don’t seem to get the point that calling women “girls” is sexist, no matter how funny you believe your remarks to be.

The player in question is a girl not a woman.

[skydyr]

Depending on the relationship between the people involved and the other people around, the comment can be completely appropriate as gentle ribbing or a humorous compliment, or it can be quite inappropriate. It is of course difficult for an admin to tell which is which without prior knowledge of the parties involved, so I'm not surprised to hear that they would err on the side of caution, especially since other observers wouldn't necessarily take it in the correct context either.

But that's the thing. It's a public go server not a small club where everyone knows each other and knows what can and cannot be said.

Yeah, I'm agreeing with you, though maybe I wasn't the most clear on that

[Bill Spight]

Depending on the relationship between the people involved and the other people around, the comment can be completely appropriate as gentle ribbing or a humorous compliment, or it can be quite inappropriate. It is of course difficult for an admin to tell which is which without prior knowledge of the parties involved, so I'm not surprised to hear that they would err on the side of caution, especially since other observers wouldn't necessarily take it in the correct context either.

But that's the thing. It's a public go server not a small club where everyone knows each other and knows what can and cannot be said.

I am going to have to start ignoring this thread. I keep pulling myself in. OTOH, some of my previous remarks seemed to be helpful.

How hard would it be for the admin to send a private message to the player who was perhaps the butt of some sexist remarks and ask, "Is that guy bothering you?"

When I became a bridge director I took a course from the directors of national tournaments in the US. Tournament bridge has complicated laws, and having to rule on possible violations is a common task for a director. We were taught that the first thing to do when making a ruling is to find out what happened. IMHO, that principle applies in this case. If you do not know what can and cannot be said between the people involved, find out. Ask what is going on. Do not make a ruling from ignorance.