Topic: Regarding threats of rape

[seaotter]

I didn't hear anyone say we should change the rules. I want to know Beleths understanding of the rules.


[Edit: more descriptive subject line: -Beleth]

[seaotter]

Any forum user who posts a credible threat of bodily harm to another user of this forum will be banned immediately.

Not actionable in isolated cases:
Comments such as "You don't know what you're talking about," or "Obviously you have a comprehension problem."
One or two phrases focused on the perceived flaws of other users.
Isolated, incidental, mild namecalling.
Isolated, mild mockery.

Actionable when directed at another user:
Repeated insults, even if mild, especially if the same person posts a succession of insults.
Repeated or severe namecalling.
Repeated mockery.
Any foul language directed at another user.
Abusive language directed at another user. Example: "Garbage like you doesn't deserve to live."
Sidetracking of topics with a series of posts in which even mild insults are traded.
Sidetracking of topics into a multiple-post discussion of the perceived shortcomings of other users.
More than one or two brief sentences or phrases focused on the shortcoming of other users.

[Belgarath]

Why don't you start.  What do you think the rules should be?

Also, I posted in the other thread my opinion of the 'rules' as I would apply them.

[seaotter]

The rules seem fine to me. I'm worried about Beleths interpretation of them.

Particularly this one.

Abusive language directed at another user. Example: "Garbage like you doesn't deserve to live."

[Beleth]

Okay.

Let's start small and work our way up.
Is consensual sex "bodily harm"? No.
Is nonconsensual sex (rape) "bodily harm"? While there are hypothetical situations where it isn't, I'm going to summarily say "yes" anyway (Yeah, I'm waaay out there on a limb, I know.)
It follows that a threat of rape is summarily a "threat of bodily harm".

And now of course we get to "credible".
It is my experience that there are about a million threats of bodily harm on the Internet to every actual case of bodily harm. Maybe even more. So I'm going to go out on another limb and say that most threats are not credible.
In fact I will go so far out as to say that my null hypothesis is that a threat is not credible.
In other words, I need to be convinced that a threat is credible before I impose a sanction.
This convincing can come from evidence provided by the target of the threat, or it can come from my own investigation.
If I see that both the threatener and the target have IP addresses in the same city, for instance, that's a big step towards credibility.
But I am not going to do more than a cursory investigation, because like I said the chance that it's actually credible is about a million to one, and I have a couple other things to do.
I will be open to other evidence provided to me, of course.

Of the "actionable/not actionable" section, the key line is "Abusive language directed at another user."
This time, the sticking word is "abusive".
Sometimes the relationship between two people is obvious to me. If Karyn said "TheLostVertex, I'm going to give you a roofie/viagra cocktail and ride you till Springer comes on," I would not consider that abusive because I know that they are good friends and that she'd be joking.
However, if someone quoted Mike Tyson's infamous line "I'm going to rape you till you love me," well, that's a whole different story, especially if there's a heated argument going on at the time.
But all they'd probably get is a warning.

I'm in a lose/lose situation here. If I ban someone for a single, non-credible, rape threat, then half of the members here will come after me with pitchforks saying "Really, Beleth? You took that seriously? You're incompetent." But if I give someone a warning, it'll look like I've done nothing (because I don't discuss warnings with third parties (and that behavior is non-negotiable)), so the other half of the members here will come after me with pitchforks saying "Really, Beleth? You let that slide? You're incompetent."

[seaotter]

I feel much better. Yes you think rape threats should be censored on the forums?

[Beleth]

Depends on what you mean by "censored".

Am I going to put a big black bar over the threat, or delete the post? Probably not.

Am I going to treat it like any other type of credible threat or abusive language? Yes.

[seaotter]

Depends on what you mean by "censored".

Am I going to put a big black bar over the threat, or delete the post? Probably not.

Am I going to treat it like any other type of credible threat or abusive language? Yes.

Sounds good.