I imagine I would have to warn them to provide facts to their claims or not to make claims that are designed to instigate. That is completely against the ROE from my understanding of it.
Someone will always claim a bias or a overbearing mediation if they are not agreed with on their points. I have taken to somewhat removing it from the hands of the mods and point blank asking some posters if they actually have a counter point. All too many times we as posters either get into arguments that are baseless or we ignore the poster. Both actions then perpetuate the problem.
In my opinion, both as a Mod and a sometimes contributing member, there's nothing wrong with asking another poster to back up their claims or assertions, with an outside link or source.
This allows for everyone else to gauge the validity of an opinion based upon both the sources that they provide, and the history of the member posting.
If it can be proven that the sources provided are "
suspect," then those sources should be called into question rather than the person posting.
However, if someone is known for regularly posting without links, sources, or at least excerpts from a book, or Op-Ed, then we should all consider that thread either "
baiting" or that member is "
trolling" for attention, and should therefore be ignored.
The problem is, one is actionable against the rules, while the other is open to debate.
That still doesn't necessarily make that member a liar, or a troll for that matter, just perhaps not very versed in the
Rules of Engagement here, or they do in fact have an opinion, but are having a hard time articulating themselves.
I think it's those who refuse to be moved or swayed by other opinions or topics, even after they've been proven to be false, or based upon a myth who still refuse to at least acknowledge a different perspective, that their honesty is called into question.
As a Moderator, all that I can do is to enforce the RoE (
which has recently been renamed CE&P Essential Information, and the new 3.0 version will be rolled out soon), and expect others not to engage a member, or post in their thread if what they're saying drives them nuts, or if that member has demonstrated that they can't be reasoned with.
It's like my Grandpa always use to say, "
never argue with a fool, because those listening to the argument won't be able to tell the difference."
