The problem wasn't just the linked posts. The problem was that all of that user's recent activity consisted of, or resembled, the linked posts.

That and the fact that most of the linked threads contained mod actions, so it's not like the user wasn't receiving constant warnings.

Well, I only linked there as examples, since that was recent. Numerous in the past as well from other posters, and I know I'm not the only one that's had such posts directed at them. Personally, things like that don't bother me at all (especially considering the source), but just SEEING them in threads doesn't do much for the content offered. How does something like this:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...3/#post6088498
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ml#post6003941

...add to the knowledge offered in the thread? And it casts a poor light on someone finding that thread via a Google search, to see someone rant like that...those are my only points.

I'm really sorry, but I do not really understand (without referring to any post or any member, just in general):
1. you can put a poster on your ignore list
2. you can (need to?) report that kind of post
3. moderators will decide what to do
4. finally: "do not feed the troll"
5. why the 4 points above are not enough?

Because:
6. Others/internet-searchers don't have the ignore list, or have the same people on it.
7. The abuse *IS* reported.
8. The moderators typically leave the post in place.
9. Doesn't matter for some, where even a reply gets a nasty response.
10. See 6-9.

1 members found this post helpful.

There’s a newbie just the last couple of days who has been blasphemous, rude, and insulting. Has been reported, and ignored (by me). They seem to be very frustrated by what they’re trying to do, and have chosen to rant and rave here about it. They’ve rejected every attempt to elicit more information about what they’ve done by replying with some of the most heinous language I’ve seen on LQ.
Nothing they’ve posted has any value to future visitors, IMO. I see no reason to preserve their “contributions”, but that’s up to Jeremy.

I’ve been reminded that moderators can only take action in the fora they moderate, and this individual has been warned a couple of times that I’ve seen...so far.

2 members found this post helpful.

This mystery occupies me. Different people, each time, report this phenomenon on LQ and I cannot.

Maybe I am just no longer putting attention to obviously ill-titled posts. If it is the help-me kind of offensive post.., yes. I cannot be offended and do not read them (YES there are exceptions to the rule and I admit).

What if LQ disallowed 1-word titles? Not that it impeded anybody to write rubbish, but starting off heating up your brain to create an acceptable title, then having to cool it down again to become your ranting alter-ego, might put a brake to some of the frailer potty mouths.

“Abusive Posts”, by the way, has almost given me bad forebodings about what I will find within. The evaluation is not yet done. But this kind of thread title allows a lot of diversions which should (IMHO) be avoided; sometimes “avoided at all cost”.

It is like an invitation, or is it?

Well, we want to give new users a reasonable amount of time to learn to behave. Hence, a progressive systems of warnings, infractions and temp-bans. Some problematic users have improved.

Rude and insulting, I can understand you taking umbrage at. But blasphemous? Really? We're not living in the 19th century here, if you don't mind me saying so. We should not be imposing our religious beliefs on others.

1 members found this post helpful.

I think he meant "foul-mouthed".

1 members found this post helpful.

I cannot know what scasey meant to say, but if you ban blasphemy you must ban me. In France it is covered by the constitution and even if I am German, here, I tend to claim my right to be blasphemous... on LinuxQuestions.org anyway.

Nobody objects to you being blasphemous, Michael, if you do it in the Faith and Religion thread. It isn't appropriate in a technical forum.

2 members found this post helpful.

I beg to differ. If I say "My god!" or "Jesus!" in a technical forum, that could easily be (and will be) interpreted by some as blasphemy, to cite just two examples. These things could be said as a reaction for example to some news about yet another Intel chip attack vector being revealed.

Alternatively, any reaction to someone who uses religious terminology in a technical thread, which does happen occasionally, such as saying "Your 'God' has nothing to do with this subject, if they exist at all" could be seen as blasphemy against that person's deity.

As I said, we're not living in the 19th century.

"Blasphemy". I almost feel like I'm back in Salem.

1 members found this post helpful.

Mayhaps I used the wrong word. The context was being called a “God D**n idiot” in response to a request for more information and provision of a search suggestion. It was a particularly venomous attack directed at me, and not just a gratuitous exclamation, which I’d not even comment on, much less report. The response has been since purged.

I didn’t mean to drag this thread off topic. I just wanted to bring that particular member to the attention of “management.” Done.

2 members found this post helpful.

Don't worry, you didn't drag the thread off topic. I did. In the context you provided, I'm fairly certain that "God damn" was just being used to add emphasis to the invective of "idiot" though, that's all. Personal attacks such as the one you describe are definitely to be frowned upon in the forum, but in my mind, blasphemy is not an issue here, and to start describing similar terminology as such would be imposing the religious beliefs of one set of people onto another, which is not cool.

Anyway, it's been a while. Hope you're doing well!

1 members found this post helpful.

I couldn't agree more, it's just one example of how the mis-use of a term can obfuscate the real issue, and there's enough of that going on today without my adding to it. Worth calling out, IMO.

I'm well, thanks.

1 members found this post helpful.