[ POLL ] Is limiting replies to certain people offensive?

Post Reply New Topic

Someone recently reported me to the moderators for offensive use of a sig line, which read "It is my sincerest wish that only those people whose IQs are 130 or greater would reply to this post. Thank you." - some people with intellectual disabilities might consider it offensive.

Good.

It supports my assertion that it is offensive to request that only certain kinds of people reply to a post. I've changed the sig line and I'm starting a discussion on it.

So please answer the attached poll as honestly as possible. Thank you.

Even if I'm not offended, it sounds offensive..

Your request does seem to me to have divisive potential, Fnord, and though I am sure you did not mean to cause hurt to people who are very sensitive about IQ level and issues, the potential for hurt was there. I can guess the non-harmful intention you had when you posted it; everyone has off days - it happens.

On the contrary, I appreciate being excluded right away—it helps avoid wasting time.

I don't like anybody dictating whether I should respond to a post or not.

I'm not here to trouble anybody. I'm pretty good at "self-editing" and "self-censorship."

But I don't like feeling restricted, either.

Anybody has a right to respond to one my posts. I might not like some of the responses--but that's too bad for me.

We are living in the real world, and I cannot expect everybody to agree with me all the time.

What If:

I post a personal issue in The Haven, and ask that only males should reply because "... only another man could possibly understand what I'm going through"?

I post a Biblical question in PP&R, and ask that only Christians should reply because "... only another Christian would comprehend the spiritual meaning behind the answer"?

I post a relationship question in L&D, and ask that only married people should reply because "... only another married person would understand the dynamics of a committed relationship"?

Would any of these be offensive?

I say people can request what they want and people can argue it out on the thread.

What if someone doesn't know what their IQ is?

Actually I'm surprised to pick "maybe or maybe not" because It sounds like it would be rude, but some threads are asking opinions just from women or just from men (especially about dating). Sometimes I'm offended with just wanting replies from Aspies, but as an NT maybe my opinion wouldn't help, idk. At the same time, maybe someone who isn't supposed to answer will have a way of thinking about the topic that no one else would have thought of so then the OP would lose out. Too bad, so sad.

If I'm asked, as a man, not to respond to a certain post, I won't respond to the post--no questions asked. This is a request made in good faith.

If somebody tells me not to respond to a post because I am ME, then I'd get a little more offended. I would accede to the request--but I wouldn't like it much. I wouldn't believe the request was made in good faith--it was made to insult me.

In my view, the clichéd expression "Discretion is the better part of valor" is most applicable here.

If someone expects me to remain silent and unresponsive while he or she launches into bigoted rants against others for their appearances, disabilities, ethnicities, gender preferences, or sex-at-birth, then they are sadly mistaken.

If someone wants a private discussion, then they might do well to consider having that discussion via Private Messages. PMs even allow for quoting and multiple addressing.

I like your style quite a lot and I agree with you on quite a few thing including your stance in the Misogyny thread, but I had to report because anyone could have seen your signature anywhere in the forum. Out of context it could have really upset someone who has extreme anxiety issues about their intelligence. It wasn't to shut you down.