4

It was my understanding that specifically naming someone as an example is bad form, such as, in the past, when a particular user has been named as someone who votes to close posts, but does not participate in other ways, when we were talking about how many questions were closed.

Recently, there was an issue between two users here when one was posting comments about the other, which I flagged, and which were, in fact, deleted for being abusive.

Then, the one poster who had his comments flagged, posted a question here, and singled out that same user who he'd posted comments about on another question.

When I flagged that post, I was informed that that person's name would be removed, but only because that person was obviously upset.

I was under the impression that you simply did not reference other users as this was considered "calling out" other users and a violation of the "Be nice" policy.

If this is not the case, then what are the rules regarding this? I'm asking because I am feeling quite confused by all of this.

  • 1
    Rules? Or bad form? I wasn't aware we had a "must not name someone" rule. Clearly it's bad form though. I may be mistaken. BTW - where do we keep "rules" anyway? – Joe Strazzere Mar 4 at 23:25
  • 1
    We have rules?... I've been named a few times.... I don't remember anything in particular being done about it... – Kilisi Mar 5 at 11:14
  • 1
    @JoeStrazzere I'd like to know as well, as I seem to be racking up more time in the penalty box than most of the NHL – Richard Says Reinstate Monica Mar 5 at 13:21
  • 2
    Where do we draw the line? Is calling someone a 'pantywaist snowflake' acceptable? I've thought of saying that in comments a few times to a couple of people but desisted. – Kilisi Mar 9 at 1:57
  • 1
    @Kilisi I've been suspended for less. I don't have your restraint – Richard Says Reinstate Monica Mar 9 at 13:56
  • 2
    @RichardU have you tried blaming 'bad English'? It's a blanket excuse that covers pretty much everything – Kilisi Mar 9 at 22:40
4

The short answer: I believe most of this is covered here: Code of Conduct

After reading it again, I don't see anything specific about "naming names" but I think we can use the Code of Conduct as a basis to our approach to this particular situation.

For instance, if I were to say "I think Richards answer offers some great advise" as part of an answer or comment, I think that could be acceptable. If I were to state in my answer "Richards answer is a load of crap" that would not be acceptable.

From the code of conduct, strongly related IMO:

  • No name-calling or personal attacks. Focus on the content, not the person. This includes terms that feel personal even when they're applied to content (e.g. “lazy”).
  • No bigotry. We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. When in doubt, just don’t.
  • No harassment. This includes, but isn’t limited to: bullying, intimidation, vulgar language, direct or indirect threats, sexually suggestive remarks, patterns of inappropriate social contact, and sustained disruptions of discussion.

In other words, let's all play nice together.

  • 5
    Ah, but that wouldn't apply because all of my answers are great – Richard Mar 6 at 11:47
  • 3
    I remember you name called me late last year. You shouted my posts were "crxp". Feeling strange you're posting this yourself ... – SmallChess Mar 6 at 15:04
  • @SmallChess Link? That seems rather out of character for Mister Positive. – wizzwizz4 Mar 18 at 20:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .