Originally Posted by anonplz
No, neither of those examples is a personal attack.
A personal attack must be personal; it must attack someone personally, by name, or by use of "you" in response to someone's post.
An FA may find "FA's are idiots" offensive, but it is not a personal attack. I may find "New Yorkers are idiots" offensive, but that is not a personal attack. Someone could post "People suck," does that make it a personal attack?
See, that's the problem that I have with trying to define a personal attack. It seems that
semantics are more important that
intent.
For example, assume that I disagree with Anonplz's post.
I could respond:
Anonplz, you're just stupid. The use of the word "you" has no bearing on whether an attack is personal or not. If you think that, you must have mush for brains"
Or, I could respond:
"The position taken by the poster in the quoted reference is just stupid. The use of the word "you" has no bearing on whether an attack is person or not. If a person were to think that, that person must have mush for brains"
IMHO, there is absolutely no difference in the
intent of the two above responses. But, some Flyertalkers and moderators seem to get bent out of shape by posts like the first response. But see nothing wrong with posts like the second response. In my opinion, people who see these responses in that way have mush for brains.
Please note, the two examples give were for discussion purposes only. In no way should they be read to say that Anonplz, or any other Flyertalker, has mush for brains.