R&R: Results of collaboration week

If I were to gauge such a response, I would say that it exists within a given range that spans from "inciting anger" at one boundary and "indifference" at the other. At best, the statement has no value. At worst, it stirs feelings of resentment and disdain. It is important to understand that certain members of South Perry don't show all their emotions on the surface. I know that certain people have discussed adding members to the ignore list in order to avoid getting his confrontations with certain users. Therefore even though it may appear that such statements do not issue concern, it may have larger implications that lead to underlying factors such as complete censorship of another user.

In addition, it is ironic that there is debate over this with moderation over the statement, "Reported X, enjoy your Y" given that the only tangible hypothetical argument that comes to mind is that it rallies support of moderation. The fact that there is debate indicates that the intentions masked behind the statement conceal a direct smite against another person, relying on a formulaic response makes it even more impersonal as it appears to impersonalize what is really a personal attack against another user. As Eos mentioned before, this is also done via Rick Rolling in order to show spite, disdain, or disrespect to another user. Even though I was debating whether or not I should milk it out, I issued an attack along the lines of "Reported X, enjoy your Y" to y0y0y0y0shi0 in order to generate a response that displayed the fact that such statements can get off-topic. I decided to refrain.

Finally, I agree that flaming and trolling accusations are similar to "reported x, enjoy your y" as far as the game of semantics goes. There are many ways of explaining dislike rather than referring to a simple syntax formula. The fact that such argument is generated over the principal of this is partially disturbing as it insinuates that this is something to be treasured, valued, and respected as a superior modicom of funhouse tradition. I disagree in principal that flaming and trolling accusations share similar intentions to "reported x, enjoy your y" as it is more likely that accusations are used as a method to point out such deviant behavior instead of pointing out failures post-implementation. In other words, "reported x, enjoy your y" seems to imply a substantial amount of hostility because the moderators have already made their judgment call and it should be up to the user and the moderation team to work out the handling of the infraction. The process is not intended for a captive audience to mock and jeer or monopolize off the interaction that has occurred as a third party.

If we were to gauge things on the value of principle, the Funhouse is supposed to be a place to incite humor and jokes. Even though the actual condition of the Funhouse is up to personal speculation, the principal is the fact that it's ideally supposed to be a place where everyone can get together for a laugh. Issuing such a statement as "reported x, enjoy your y" or "yourteachersaresodelicious.jpg" indicate jeering and a sense of disapproval. In essence, if we were better users then there wouldn't be this discrepancy between what should be the condition of the funhouse and what it actually turns out being. Even though I am of mixed belief on what I believe the purpose of rules constitute, I am personally dissatisfied with the status quo established by the funhouse as I find it to constitute complaining, personal attacks on other users, and a general region of senseless vigilantism. Normally I believe that rules should be implemented in order to reflect the needs of the community and to make it a better place. In principle, this rule lays down the impression that we shouldn't denigrate to personal attacks in a forum section intended for humor. Perhaps one of the lowest forms of humor is one that relies on attacking other users in order to make a point. Again, I fall short on many principles of what I believe to be morally just and ideal. We all fall short. But it doesn't change the fact that we can try to be a better and more mature community.

A thought out response that didn't come off as though you're trying to be a smug pimento. Now go teach Eos how to do that. I'll concede that you're right, though I never understood censorship of single words or phrases.