This sounds like a small thing, but it isn’t. Known as ad hominem (Latin for “toward the person”), direct attacks on people instead of their opinions causes people to shut down and prevent positive change from even being considered.
What are some other reasons to avoid these types of attacks?
There is a value to any human being that lies deeper than their ideas. An inherently good person can carry ideas we strongly disagree with, and still be a good person.
Realizing that none of us has cornered the market on virtue is key to understanding why attacking a person’s self, rather than their ideas, can be so destructive. it goes after the wrong thing, and makes it really hard to build bridges. When we open our heart to the possibility that the other person is actually okay, and just thinks differently than we do, it makes it much easier to relate to where they’re coming from.
This is why we ask you, when you engage with others on PocketChange, to refrain from attacking other people and stick to criticizing their ideas.
What is in violation of this policy?
- “Go take your meds”
- “Tinfoil hat too tight?”
- “Just repeating what you heard on NPR/CNN/Fox again?”
- “People like you are our problem.”
What is NOT in violation of this policy?
Indirect attacks on, or criticism of, a third party other than the target of the comment are allowed, because they frequently are the base for legitimate political opinion.
- “The President is a fool.”
- “My barber needs to take his meds.”
- “That guy on the city council is crazy.”
When moderating conversations on PocketChange, we work hard to apply the above standards fairly. However, the issue of personal attacks ultimately comes down to judgment. On this standard, as well as in other requirements of the platform, the judgment of PocketChange is final. You voluntarily accept this as a condition of your access to the platform.