Debate Now Incivility

[Gracie]

So the innocent pays the price and those initiating and perpetuating the incivility can high five each other and celebrate their victory.

That about sums it up perfectly.
The only way to stop bullies is to lock them up where they get the same treatment from other bullies....or lock them out where people can live in peace. Or, like that guy did that sun devil spoke about...stop them from breathing (which then means the innocent ones STILL have to pay for the crime).

 

[Foxfyre]

So the innocent pays the price and those initiating and perpetuating the incivility can high five each other and celebrate their victory.

That about sums it up perfectly.
The only way to stop bullies is to lock them up where they get the same treatment from other bullies....or lock them out where people can live in peace. Or, like that guy did that sun devil spoke about...stop them from breathing (which then means the innocent ones STILL have to pay for the crime).

But again where are the damages? On what basis do we lock up the bullies? If somebody here at USMB tears into me, accuses me or somebody else of all manner of uncomplimentary traits or characteristics, calls in his/her friends to pile on, and in general makes a person's life miserable here at USMB, what law has been broken? What damages can be shown? If no written rules have been broken--and some are masters at staying just inside TOS so there is no justification to reprimand or ban--what can anybody do? Essentially nothing.

I think it has to be a sea change in the culture. It should no longer be culturally acceptable to have rap music denigrating, insulting, demeaning people. The anti-hero on television or in the movies should no longer be celebrated and admired, but the coarse, vulger, and self-destructive should be seen as immoral and wrong again. It should be seen as disgusting and inappropriate to use a swear word in almost every line of a post. Hurling insults at people should become socially unacceptable again. People should be taught how to criticize or complain or comment or disagree without coarseness and vulgarities that encourage the immature, selfish, and mean spirited to feel license to do that.

Or does it make me a Pollyanna goody-two-shoes to suggest that? Is there a better halfway measure between Puritanical morality and the coarse, vulgar society we seem to have become?

 

[Alex.]

Adding detrimental puts a different spin now I would hope that a ruling council would step in and make that behavior taboo, if the society(parents, clergy, elders)cannot step in and provide a remedy to the situation.

So we can say we now have your vote in favor of federal laws mandating civility?

Civility no, criminal behavior under certain circumstances yes.

But when it comes to incivility, what constitutes criminal behavior? Certainly I think slander and libel laws should apply when a person's reputation is falsely compromised or such as that, but we already have laws on the book addressing that. Certainly threats of violence or other harmful actions constitute assault and there are already laws on the books about that.

But--and this is for the purpose of illustration only and is not to be taken literally by anybody--if I call "Fred" an ignorant numbnut, what damages can be claimed that could be addressed by law? If I get on Facebook and tell embarassing stories about him that happen to be true, or make uncomplimentary comments about his appearance or mannerisms or whatever, what damages can he claim? The insult a minute expected from certain members of a message board may spoil somebody's enjoyment of the board but are great fun for others. What laws would address that?

Fred needs to make a decision, if he does not like what is being said either he ignores it or leaves IMO. The TOS agreement should also help him and everyone else understand what is acceptable and what is not. People have said mean things about me, who cares I know it is not true, and if it is true then I have an evil laugh because I probably had fun at being an ass.

I think you're missing the point. If the only recourse we have to incivility in our lives is to remove ourselves from it, that is all well and good if we have someplace to go. In the case of persons targeted for incivility, however, they are forced to give up something they value--their job, their school, their job, use of social media, participation in public activities, participation on a message board--or the incivility continues. So the innocent pays the price and those initiating and perpetuating the incivility can high five each other and celebrate their victory.

There has to be a better way.

You were talking about a FB and now have expended it that is a good thing.

In the case of jobs, there are laws, in the case of school there are laws, in the case of social media they have TOS and the other options I mentioned, public participation depends on what is being done, message board has TOS.

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

 

[Foxfyre]

So we can say we now have your vote in favor of federal laws mandating civility?

Civility no, criminal behavior under certain circumstances yes.

But when it comes to incivility, what constitutes criminal behavior? Certainly I think slander and libel laws should apply when a person's reputation is falsely compromised or such as that, but we already have laws on the book addressing that. Certainly threats of violence or other harmful actions constitute assault and there are already laws on the books about that.

But--and this is for the purpose of illustration only and is not to be taken literally by anybody--if I call "Fred" an ignorant numbnut, what damages can be claimed that could be addressed by law? If I get on Facebook and tell embarassing stories about him that happen to be true, or make uncomplimentary comments about his appearance or mannerisms or whatever, what damages can he claim? The insult a minute expected from certain members of a message board may spoil somebody's enjoyment of the board but are great fun for others. What laws would address that?

Fred needs to make a decision, if he does not like what is being said either he ignores it or leaves IMO. The TOS agreement should also help him and everyone else understand what is acceptable and what is not. People have said mean things about me, who cares I know it is not true, and if it is true then I have an evil laugh because I probably had fun at being an ass.

I think you're missing the point. If the only recourse we have to incivility in our lives is to remove ourselves from it, that is all well and good if we have someplace to go. In the case of persons targeted for incivility, however, they are forced to give up something they value--their job, their school, their job, use of social media, participation in public activities, participation on a message board--or the incivility continues. So the innocent pays the price and those initiating and perpetuating the incivility can high five each other and celebrate their victory.

There has to be a better way.

You were talking about a FB and now have expended it that is a good thing.

In the case of jobs, there are laws, in the case of school there are laws, in the case of social media they have TOS and the other options I mentioned, public participation depends on what is being done, message board has TOS.

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

Alex, I am sure that makes perfectly good sense to you, but I have no idea what you are saying. At no time was I talking about only Facebook. I did include social media in the whole mix of where incivility happens. And the incivility I am speaking about has nothing to do with laws or TOS or any other means society uses to govern itself.

One or two here have suggested the law should be expanded, but nobody wants to suggest what should be enforceable as illegal that isn't illegal already.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

 

[Foxfyre]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

Stating historical facts is not an ad hom since no individuals were identified.

Ad hominem Define Ad hominem at Dictionary.com

ad hominem
[ad hom-uh-nuh m -nem, ahd‐]
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

 

[Foxfyre]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

Stating historical facts is not an ad hom since no individuals were identified.

Ad hominem Define Ad hominem at Dictionary.com

ad hominem
[ad hom-uh-nuh m -nem, ahd‐]
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Rule One:
1. Stay on topic with no ad hominem or personal insults directed at any specific person or group participating in this discussion or elsewhere

And since it is a fact that you cannot prove or support in any way that it was RW bullies as opposed to any other bullies, even using the limited definition you pulled up, your comment is ad hominem. I have no problem with citing history. But I do not want the discussion to dissolve into a food fight over the sins of a specific group identified by ideology. I am sure many other members have experienced bullying by various segments of USMB society who were in no way RW.

But while we're on the topic, one example of incivility that should be addressed is the tactic of assigning sins and traits to groups of people based on prejudice and perception rather than reality.

 

[Alex.]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

"A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread." How so? Is "RW bullies" a poster or group here?

 

[Foxfyre]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

"A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread." How so? Is "RW bullies" a poster here?

It was used as a derogatory characterization of a group of people at USMB in a way that cannot be supported by any evidence in fact but can be explained only on a basis of personal prejudice or perception.

But such personal prejudice and/or perception is a frequent tool used to accomplish incivility at USMB, in the MSM, in social media, and in government as expressed in the OP.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And since it is a fact that you cannot prove or support in any way that it was RW bullies

But I can do so!

The amount of rep that each poster had was ranked by USMB. The top 20 posters in the forum with the highest rep were all on the right. In fact there were no LW posters on the entire first page of 30 posters. That is not to say that the bullies were all on the first page because they weren't. But the tone was there and it was reflected not only in those rankings but in the numerous threads complaining about the bullying that was rampant. Those threads still exist if you care to look them up for yourself.

So yes, the bias was there and the bullying was there and it was so egregious that the USMB administrators chose to eliminate rep entirely in this new platform even though they had the option to transfer it over.

Now you can argue that it wasn't only RW'ers who were doing it and that was true once the LW'ers figured out how the system worked. They had reason enough for payback IMO.

Speaking for myself I considered negative repping to be the worst aspect of USMB and I did my utmost to render it ineffective it was an uncivil practice that resulted in unnecessary discord and harm to innocents as Alex refers to them.

 

[Foxfyre]

And since it is a fact that you cannot prove or support in any way that it was RW bullies

But I can do so!

The amount of rep that each poster had was ranked by USMB. The top 20 posters in the forum with the highest rep were all on the right. In fact there were no LW posters on the entire first page of 30 posters. That is not to say that the bullies were all on the first page because they weren't. But the tone was there and it was reflected not only in those rankings but in the numerous threads complaining about the bullying that was rampant. Those threads still exist if you care to look them up for yourself.

So yes, the bias was there and the bullying was there and it was so egregious that the USMB administrators chose to eliminate rep entirely in this new platform even though they had the option to transfer it over.

Now you can argue that it wasn't only RW'ers who were doing it and that was true once the LW'ers figured out how the system worked. They had reason enough for payback IMO.

Speaking for myself I considered negative repping to be the worst aspect of USMB and I did my utmost to render it ineffective it was an uncivil practice that resulted in unnecessary discord and harm to innocents as Alex refers to them.

Drop it DT. You're out of line pushing this. It does not matter who had the highest rep nor does that provide any proof of bullying, of who bullied who, or who started it, or anything else. So please return to the topic or I will start reporting the infractions.

Now to return to the topic, rep bullies of all ideologies did exist at USMB and many have greatly objected to not being able to continue that practice. I see this as a symptom of the larger underlying problem of hurting, insulting, or demeaning people as sport and how incivility is commonly expressed. What prompts people to do this?

Should USMB (and other forums, venues, and groups) institute hard fast rules to prevent it such as the rules on this thread? Why or why not?

 

[Derideo_Te]

What prompts people to do this?

Low self esteem IMO.

In essence bullies suffer from low self esteem because they lack the ability to rise any higher. Without that option they try to bring others down to their own level instead.

Should USMB (and other forums, venues, and groups) institute hard fast rules to prevent it such as the rules on this thread? Why or why not?

Given that USMB did exactly that in hindsight I agree that it was the right decision. The amount of time and effort that was wasted trying to manage the incivility from the bullying was detracting from the overall experience.

So yes, I would agree that putting in place hard and fast rules that deal with bullying and incivility do work. Have they stopped all of the incivility? Nope, and it is probably impossible without infringing on freedom of speech. But it can be "discouraged" and in that regard USMB has an effective tool that does exactly that, it discourages those that are incapable of behaving in a civilized manner.

So the answer is all of the above. Use both hard and soft approaches.

 

[Foxfyre]

What prompts people to do this?

Low self esteem IMO.

In essence bullies suffer from low self esteem because they lack the ability to rise any higher. Without that option they try to bring others down to their own level instead.

Should USMB (and other forums, venues, and groups) institute hard fast rules to prevent it such as the rules on this thread? Why or why not?

Given that USMB did exactly that in hindsight I agree that it was the right decision. The amount of time and effort that was wasted trying to manage the incivility from the bullying was detracting from the overall experience.

So yes, I would agree that putting in place hard and fast rules that deal with bullying and incivility do work. Have they stopped all of the incivility? Nope, and it is probably impossible without infringing on freedom of speech. But it can be "discouraged" and in that regard USMB has an effective tool that does exactly that, it discourages those that are incapable of behaving in a civilized manner.

So the answer is all of the above. Use both hard and soft approaches.

Admittedly eliminating rep and the institution of the CDZ, the Lounge, the SDZ, and efforts to keep the political threads more on topic have been appreciated by those who are not among the uncivil 'cults'. But elsewhere, on any threads that lend themselves to more provocative topics, I am frankly seeing so little civility that serious discussion of those topics has become difficult to accomplish.

I'm just not seeing it getting any better and if anything it has become worse. Are all those who participate in the insult fest, who organize pile ons targeting certain individuals, who instigate and relish the food fights all suffering from low self esteem?

Do all the politicos and talking heads and pundits and social media people et al participating in the uncivil rhetoric all suffer from low self esteem?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Incivility is nothing new.

During the 1980's and 1990's, the House of Representatives allowed members to make after hours speeches on any topic. These 'special orders' were almost always presented to empty seats, and they were carried on Cspan (who wasn't allowed to show the empty seats) so we were able to listen in. And some of these were so angry and vitriolic, they made a body shudder. Bob Dornan of California was there almost every night accusing the Clinton administration. Henry Gonzalez of Texas was there almost every night accusing President Reagan and President G.H.W. Bush.

During the same period, AOL (and other) chat rooms became popular. The political and religion rooms were always packed with people taking advantage of anonymity to say the most outrageous and hateful things to each other. That tradition has seemed to carry over to message boards that have mostly replaced the chat rooms and has become commonplace in our national culture.

“In today’s America, incivility is on prominent display: in the schools, where bullying is pervasive; in the workplace, where an increasing number are more stressed out by coworkers than their jobs; on the roads, where road rage maims and kills; in politics, where strident intolerance takes the place of earnest dialogue; and on the web, where many check their inhibitions at the digital door,” says Pier M. Forni, author of “The Civility Solution: What to Do When People are Rude” and director of The Civility Initiative at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

“How in the world can we stop bullying in schools, in the workplace, in politics, when it is so close to our national character right now?” asks Dr. Gary Namie, a psychologist and cofounder of the Workplace Bullying Institute, a Washington state–based nonprofit.​

TOPIC TO BE DISCUSSED:

Why are people uncivil and so often say hateful or insulting or hurtful things to each other in this and other environments? What do they get out of it? Do they hope to accomplish something? Has anybody ever had their mind changed by somebody yelling at them and/or being insulting? What purpose does it serve? Is there some sort of personal satisfaction attached to it? And is this a good thing? Bad thing? Can it harm people? What affect, if anything, does incivility have on others, especially kids?

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION

1. Stay on topic with no ad hominem or personal insults directed at any specific person or group participating in this discussion or elsewhere.

2. To avoid getting bogged down, for purposes of this discussion only, the OP reserves the right to specify what definitions will be used if there is any dispute about that.

3. If you post a link, please give at least a brief description of what we will learn if we click on that link. Links can be useful, but are not required to express an opinion in this discussion.

"""Why are people uncivil and so often say hateful or insulting or hurtful things to each other in this and other environments? ...."""

They are actually fairly civil when face to face. It's anonymous message boards like this that gives one free reign to say what they are really thinking. They can drop the fake social mask and be honest. Let their hypocrisy hang out and they don't care.

Me? Nope. I'm up front and unedited regardless of here or anywhere else. Just last week I had about eight Republicans pile on me because I took exception to an attack on Biden while he was barely back from his son's funeral. My goodness those people could barely restrain themselves. I'm sure a couple of people wanted to hit me. But true to human nature in real life situations, they were totally fake.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Do all the politicos and talking heads and pundits and social media people et al participating in the uncivil rhetoric all suffer from low self esteem?

In my opinion, yes they do!

I would give examples but that might derail the thread and that would be counter productive.

Suffice to say that if you examine the most virulent of the politicos, talking heads and pundits on either side of the political aisle you will find aspects of an inferiority complex.

That is not to say that this applies to all politicos, talking heads and pundits because there are plenty who are above the fray and more than capable of making their points without any incivility at all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This "Drop it DT. You're out of line pushing this. It does not matter who had the highest rep nor does that provide any proof of bullying, of who bullied who, or who started it, or anything else. So please return to the topic or I will start reporting the infractions." is an example of bullying. Please report it. In fact, I just reported it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

This "Drop it DT. You're out of line pushing this. It does not matter who had the highest rep nor does that provide any proof of bullying, of who bullied who, or who started it, or anything else. So please return to the topic or I will start reporting the infractions." is an example of bullying. Please report it.

I just considered it to be ironic and let it go.

Yes, FF and I rub each other wrong way from time to time and as long as we give each other the benefit of the doubt there is no harm, no foul.

I will admit to getting a chuckle out of it so it was all good IMO.

 

[Alex.]

The innocent pay the price as far as their willingness to cave in and give up. The innocent far outweigh the perpetrators of the incivility, they can reach out to others and gain strength in numbers while effectuating change through the acceptable methods.

When I first arrived here at USMB the place was overrun with RW bullies who shamelessly abused the rep system to essentially control this forum and maintain a very rightwing slant as to what was "allowed".

There were some hardy liberals who refused to be bullied and stood up against the negative repping but it wasn't until USMB changed to this new platform and eliminated repping entirely that the bullying was effectively curtailed.

So in summary if the bullies are unrestrained they will continue to impose their uncivil behavior on others. However if they are denied the ability to intimidate and have to play on a level playing field they are outnumbered by what you referred to as the "innocents".

So now they resort to vulgarities instead. They try to intimidate by making the "innocents" feel uncomfortable and unwelcome. The bullies are essentially using incivility as a means to continue bullying since they can no longer do it in an overt manner.

Noting here a violation of Rule #1 of the thread. A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread. Bullies come in all colors, sizes, shapes, and ideologies and singling out one group for inappropriate criticism is in itself a form of incivility that this thread is intended to address.

"A characterization of "RW bullies" is ad hominem and inappropriate for this thread." How so? Is "RW bullies" a poster here?

It was used as a derogatory characterization of a group of people at USMB in a way that cannot be supported by any evidence in fact but can be explained only on a basis of personal prejudice or perception.

But such personal prejudice and/or perception is a frequent tool used to accomplish incivility at USMB, in the MSM, in social media, and in government as expressed in the OP.

So then this is your personal perception and interpretation. That is how incivility starts when one person either misinterprets or attempts to force their own measuring rod down the throats of others. To me that is an example of incivility.

If you want to suggest that may fall within the parameters we can establish as incivility then we all can weigh in and determine if it is.

 

[ChrisL]

I think it's important to remember that partisanship is like a disease and some people are just nuttier than squirrel poop. Also, some people don't seem to understand anything BUT rudeness. These types of forum can attract a lot of good people but also tend to attract the most extreme types of people. For the most part, I try to treat people in the same manner that they treat me because respect is earned, IMO.