equitable
1. impartial or reasonable; fair; just an equitable decision
Principles of Justice said:In the context of intractable conflict, the terms 'justice' and 'fairness' are often used interchangeably.
Taken in its broader sense, justice is action in accordance with the requirements of some law.[1] Some maintain that justice stems from God's will or command, while others believe that justice is inherent in nature itself. Still others believe that justice consists of rules common to all humanity that emerge out of some sort of consensus. This sort of justice is often thought of as something higher than a society's legal system. It is in those cases where an action seems to violate some universal rule of conduct that we are likely to call it "unjust."
In its narrower sense, justice is fairness. It is action that pays due regard to the proper interests, property, and safety of one's fellows.[2] While justice in the broader sense is often thought of as transcendental, justice as fairness is more context-bound. Parties concerned with fairness typically strive to work out something comfortable and adopt procedures that resemble rules of a game. They work to ensure that people receive their "fair share" of benefits and burdens and adhere to a system of "fair play."
This is a perspective issue.
Example:
Two squabbling siblings in the back seat of the car. Parent without even turning around, says "Both of you settle down or you're not going to like what I will do".
Fair or evenhanded treatment since the children are being treated equally.
Unjust since there was probably an instigator.
Observe my execution of fair behaviour.
You will understand the difference eventually.
I personally couldn't care less about that issue because I'm just here for the amusement and am very non-confrontational. But it kinda pains me (because I appreciate your contribution and like you personally) to see you banging your head against a brick wall and alienating others to counter-productively prove a point.
I have heard this viewpoint on multiple occassions. The answer is simple; if others are unwilling to improve because it is not worth the time, then I will not compromise because by the same reasoning it is not worth the time. However, I will continue to act completely in line with the forum rules in terms of my posts.
However, an important moral must be consider: I am no better than anyone, but damn if anyone thinks they are better than me. Thus where the rules have been waived in a bias way I will now assume the rule de facto no longer exists. The fact they may be controversial is irrelevant because simply it is not worth the time.
The offended can take responsibility for their decisions and understand they have generated their own offense. They have had enough warnings and red flags and back offs. I've experienced my enjoyment being trashed gradually over time until it is beyond ridiculous, with my intellectual headspace on the ventrilo server being trashed; the members who I value in the forum being pushed out by mods justifying their friends behaviour and my contributions being shoved to the graveyard in complete bias, now they can experience that action entirely fairly in return.
I see, and I'm sorry to hear that your experience here has gone down the drain. I've always enjoyed talking to you and reading your posts (granted, I've kinda disappeared for months at a time...).
I do think, however, that your expectations of standards of conduct are too high for the average individual. Or perhaps I'm too cynical?
It's all well and good to debate fairness and justice in theory but application is far more difficult and much more complicated.
Are you sure you understood what the difference between Fair and Just was when you mentioned high?
There doesn't need to be a high standard, there need only be a standard.
Either way, my posts are perfectly in line with the actions of other members of the forum. Learn to love it.
Otherwise I'm now creating my standard as I go.
I see. Well, what I meant by having "high standards" is "actually expecting a standard to be adhered to". In most organisations, online or otherwise, this isn't true except on the surface. That's also why I wondered if I'm too cynical.
Maybe I shouldn't be amused at how meta this is turning out to be... On the good side of things, this is very on-topic.