[Fiend]

TL,DR General principle: If someone is choosing to do something and choosing to share / promote it, and it's not detrimental to them, it could be okay to joke about / pisstake / criticise. BUT If it's something outside their choice / control, that they're not actively sharing / promoting, and the thing could be detrimental to them, it's probably not okay to joke about / pisstake / criticise.


Possibly fair game for humorous banter or serious criticism:

1. Anything that is within a person's control or choice, that is not detrimental to them as a person nor in their climbing, and that they are actively choosing to discuss / share / promote. E.g.

Opinions in arguments
Principles / stances / positions on issues
Choice of media tastes if shared publically
Choice of other interests if shared publically
Behaviour or misbehaviour in the climbing arena
Anything that is deliberately and publicly shown off and promoted by a person, that isn't off-limits as below.

E.g. it can be fine to joke about / pisstake / criticise someone for their defence of climbing ethical principles, their argumentative / belligerent nature, their promotion / highlighting of obscure forms of climbing, their defence of UKB threads, their extreme music taste (if they promote it), their geeky / nerdy hobbies (if they promote them), their choice of problems / routes and maybe fashion sense in their videos / photos, their tendency to draw penises in the dust on mate's cars, etc.

(Obviously it's equally important to take into account what the target might feel and in particular if they clearly express they're upset by something e.g. "Yes I post loads of videos with a death metal soundtrack, but I don't like people joking about me being a greasy old headbanger who won't get any video views" or "I know I argue vehemently against headpointing, but I think it's unfair for people accuse me of being elitist and dictatorial")


Probably off-limits for banter / criticism, and tending towards bullying:

Anything that is

1. Outside of a person's control or choice.
2. Possibly detrimental to that person, and in particular detrimental to them in the climbing arena.
3. Something that they generally keep out of arguments / discussions / self-promotion and don't highlight publically.
4. Possibly something that is commonly regarded as undesirable or unpleasant. E.g.

Physical appearance
Body composition
Race
Gender
Sexuality
Accent
Family situation
Relationship
Social situation / status
Disabilities
Injury problems
Mental health issues
Neurodivergence
Being at a lower standard in climbing
Having suffered unpleasant circumstances

E.g. it's not okay to joke about / pisstake / criticise someone for being bald, having acne, being fat, being of mixed race, having been a victim of prejudice, being gender weird, being non-binary, their age, going through a divorce, stammering, having missing teeth, having poor posture, having long covid, struggling with childcare, success or failure of investments, obsessive tendencies, body image issues, having clinical addictions, etc.

(Obviously this is for general online / casual interactions, and things can be quite different between trusted friends, and/or when someone has indicated they're fine with the subject matter)


N.B. Obviously just my opinion suggestions but I think the distinction is pretty logical.

[stone]

I suppose I've been an exasperating kill joy on this but I've only been relaying actual incidences of upset that I've come across. I haven't been hypothesising that something may offend someone in theory.

If you do care whether or not you upset anyone, then perhaps think, would I say it face-to-face to that person in public even if they were looking crest fallen as I was saying it?

In face-to-face interactions, I think very few people do press on and say stuff regardless of how it is being taken. Online, because we don't get the real-time feedback, we do. To me that is far more significant than any attempt to identify who or what is or isn't "fair-game".

I'd also say to anyone who does get upset by any online interaction, to similarly take that phenomenon into consideration. You might perceive something as wilfully humiliating you but it is very likely that wasn't the intention and the people behind it very likely are kind and decent and you're just misinterpreting.

Perhaps ironically, one major personal failing I have, is being exceptionally prone to inadvertently pressing on regardless, saying stuff in a face-to-face setting, even as it is upsetting someone. It is a personal defect that I try to work around. Perhaps that has made me aware of how unusual it is in a face-to-face setting and yet how all-to-common it is online.

[Fiend]

I suppose I've been an exasperating kill joy on this

Nah Stone you've been an interesting discussor in the last couple of months even if I disagree with what you say, and I've been meaning to write and post this for a while and your contributions spurred me on more effectively than some other exasperating killjoys 

[Fiend]

Full disclosure: I have sometimes been guilty of doing the latter, including a few years ago when I was out with a climbing partner who used to have regular banter with me, and whilst videoing them doing a climb, I took the piss out of their physical appearance (which is not something that had cropped up before). I realised this might have over-stepped the mark at the time, I can't remember if I apologised at the time but I certainly should have, and it's stuck with me as a clear example of being a likely unacceptable comment in the latter category.

[Wellsy]

I personally try to err on the side of being nicer than not, especially when it is people I don't know. Costs nothing to be kind and you never know how upsetting your "joke" might be. Happy to be called a thin skinned wokerati millennial snowflake over it too

[Fiend]

Bloody double standards, being able to take it but not dish it out 

[mrjonathanr]

Sorry Fiend, baldness is IN