I don't think it is necessarily derogatory but pretty close. I probably would not delete or edit it, but that might depend upon the other posts in that same thread or just my mood at the moment. I don't like it being there, but it certainly is not the same as: 'Hey all you morons you are all FOS because you are ignorant lame arses because you don't know anything about how to take apart a Colt and you all are POS wannabes', or something to the effect that: You are nothing but an inexperienced dirtbag scumsucking convicted felon who only has an underrated POS gun and who doesn't know jack<font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font> about tactitical stuff because you are an ignoramus and a friggin liar. I am not attributing those kinds of statements to anyone in particular, because more than one person here makes them just as bad as that.
The statement in question is a statement of fact or opinion because it is what some believes will happen to someone else in a certain situation. Just because the writer believes that the other person will perform miserably does not necessarily make it derogatory, even though it is not framed in a seemingly nice manner. When I post that I believe Andy has little if any tactical experience despite his claims to apparently know it all, am I being derogatory? (Now was that just derogatory, the know it all part - I was stating what I believe he acts like - and no it was not nice but not meant to be derogatory either). If it is true, and if it shows the person in not that great a light, or if it is opinion and also shows the person in not that great a light so be it. This of course, as long as it is not just a nasty post or simply an attack camouflaged as opinion or camouflaged as a nicely worded attack.. Well let me rephrase myself, it may actually be mildly derogatory in that it gives a low opinion of someone, but it is not derogatory in regards of the main entry for that word in Merriam-Webster's which says : 1 : detracting from the character or standing of something — often used with to, of, or from 2 : expressive of a low opinion. I don't think that that statement necessarily detracted from anyone's character, but rather that it showed what someone else believed that character to be.
I guess when it comes down to it, we should strive to keep the blatantly and even the simply fairly obvious derogatory stuff off of the site, get rid of some of the questionable or borderline stuff as we choose, and let the some borderline stuff ride also as we choose all with regard to part one of the above definition. With regard to part two of that same definition, well if we start taking away everything that people may think is derogatory, well there will be no dissenting opinions here, because anyone could legitimately say that hey I was belittled by so and so's opinion of me as expressed in this forum - remove it as per your policy. Now we don't have to put up with opinions that are blatantly derogatory either such as someone saying: In my opinion, I think the other guy is a j-erk. Yet when someone posts something like the above it seems more to me like it is an opinion about another person's survival skills be less than sufficient for the job of facing SHTF. If we are not allowed to say stuff like that, does that mean we all have to be in agreement? I will again grant that it is borderline as I see it but I don't think really derogatory.
Remember those two examples of derogatory statements I gave up above, let's look at them again in another light, and now tell me if they are derogatory or not: 'Hey all you people don't know what you are talking about because you are ignorant of the facts on this issue as apparent by your previous posts reflecting to me that you have never fully disassembled and reassembled a Colt AR15. So I think all you do is talk about it and want to make believe you are experienced like me.' Is that derogatory - maybe and maybe not. It sure would be an acceptable post from what I have seen around here, and on most other boards; and it surely says, in essence, the same thing as the nasty example I gave above but in much nicer terms. Or what about: 'You have often reported to us that you are an ex-convict, and have never mentioned an law enforcement experience on your part; yet you claim to have massive amounts of knowledge of tactical law enforcement type situations but give poor examples of tactics to be used in real life. I find it difficult to believe you when you say you have such tactical experience and I believe that you are probably not telling the truth about your knowledge but rather that you are ignorant of many modern tactical techniques and also that you lack any experience with even those of which you have book knowledge.' Is that derogatory? Sure someone could probably argue that it is especially by the second definition of the word, but would you disallow it? If we start editing stuff like this, there will be no, or few, really useful discussions on these boards because everyone will be afraid of disagreeing with anyone else or of calling them to task; and when someone makes obviously outrageous claims of his/her prowess, well then he or she should either be brought to task to defend those claims or be shown as a charlatan - but in decent and somewhat respectful terms. Therein that one word, I guess lies the key - respectful. Yes you can show someone in disparaging or derogatory terms and still be respectful in voicing it as either opinion or fact (so long as you can back it up), and then I think most times the post should remain.
)
