Don’t worry, a moderator sent me a warning about it two days ago.

Obviously what I did was against forum rules, however, I find it concerning that you are more worried about me calling someone a mean name than you are about the guy who has a history of spreading racist, anti-immigrant misinformation.

This isn’t video games, it’s not like I insulted him over console wars or game sales or graphics, I insulted him because he’s spreading fake stories that are leading to violence against entire communities and when asked to be more responsible and make sure these stories are true before posting them, he goes on a tangent about free speech and says he thinks I’m about to call him a Nazi.

I haven't followed his "history" here but if you feel he is being hateful, then that's something for the mods to deal with. 

Well then maybe get more info before butting in.

I don’t “feel” like the things he is saying are hateful, they simply are. He spread false information about a Muslim immigrant killing kids in the UK which led to riots and he spread false information about Haitian immigrants stealing and eating cats in Springfield, Ohio which has led to bomb threats at the local schools & hospitals.

When confronted about this and telling him to be more responsible and verify if stories like this are true before spreading them, instead of owning up to it, he came up with nonsense rebuttals like “that sounds too hard” and “isn’t it actually a good thing I spread misinformation?” and “freedom of speech!” and “I feel like you’re about to call me a nazi”

Obviously what I said broke forum rules but context matters and that’s probably why a moderator messaged me directly instead of punishing me. There is a huge difference between insulting someone because they think Switch 2 will be more powerful than PS5 Pro and insulting someone because they are spreading racist misinformation that has led to violence and gives nonsense excuses justifying doing so.

Misinformation should be debunked in a civil and adult manner. Name calling is counterproductive, it only entrenches people's position. You'll never change somebody's mind by yelling at them.

Read the conversation, it was civil until the person proved that they are either a troll or “insert mean name” in which case, logic and reasoning aren’t going to sway them.

Again, it’s really odd that me saying a mean word is so appalling to you but the person spreading racist stories that did in fact spread violence is treated with kid gloves.

“make sure to be nice to the person spreading made up racist/anti-immigrant/Islamophobic stories that incite violence! We wouldn’t want to offend them!”

And it's odd to me that your response to something as simple as "we shouldn't flame people" is to try to twist things to paint me as a villain, but it seems to be par for the course for American political discourse.

Given that you did receive a warning, the only reason I commented is satisfied.

Because it’s a really weird thing to fixate on given the other persons comments, it’s like if this was a conversation.

Person #1-We need another Holocaust

Person #2-You’re a piece of shit

Person #3-Name calling is against the rules

Legit's comments had already been debunked and addressed by multiple others, it hardly felt like my input was needed.

My concern was only ever the application of forum rules, not because of this specific case, but because for a while it's seemed like moderation is lot less strict nowadays. That's literally all.

Now that I know the mods did step in, my concern's been addressed, and given we've reached the point of Godwin's Law being invoked, it seems there's little more to be gained from this tangent.

Happened to me, too. And it seems to be a pretty common thing in modern debate/politics. IT's perfectly fine to push racism, sexism, bigotry, transphobia, and other forms of intolerance and violent rhetoric as long as you skirt around the edges of being explicit. 

but call one person a cunt for saying cunty things? yeah that's a paddling. 

It's okay to be terrible, but it's not okay to call them terrible if they're being purposely infuriating and you're reacting appropriately angry. It's kinda gross. 

The crux of the issue is that name calling doesn't particularly help anything. It antagonizes, evokes a response, and makes things worse rather than better. If someone is spouting off problematic things, you should try to report it. Then hopefully nip it in the bud before it gets worse.

And I get that frequently won't get the desired or even appropriate response either. 

I think there are a lot of challenges that go with giving the best response. 

What is the person actually saying? There's a reason dog whistles exist. They sound like normal things to people who don't understand the undertones. Sometimes we have to have a conversation about what that probably meant. Sometimes we engage in the conversation to see if someone was using a dog whistle or if they meant something else.

Is this person posting in good faith? A lot of the times the same conversational topics are brought up with different framing. Plenty of people on both sides of the conversation were talking about the pet eating claims. I think it's reasonable for someone to ask a good faith question about what the reality is. It's not reasonable to spread the claims as if they were true. Sometimes that's a challenge in itself. Sometimes one person is pretty sure that the question was not asked in good faith, and was just asked to stir the pot, and someone else feels that it was a good faith question.

I don't think there's a perfect line. Good people can make genuine mistakes, and terrible people can be clever about how they frame things so it seems a lot less terrible. 

And I think I personally fail even moreso, because I naively think that people can be convinced to be better. Which is almost never the case.