Unless something is SPELLED OUT, then I am NOT about to read between the lines and try to put words into the RM's text.
Oh you FOOLISH Galatians!
Who has bewitched you?
Galatians 3:1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh you FOOLISH Galatians!
Who has bewitched you?
Galatians 3:1
I said "seems to" simply because my reading strongly hints at it, and the policy doesn't spell out every conceivable violation. Some excerpts with my comments following:
"For something to be "making it personal" it must be speaking to another Freeper, personally."Protestants are heretics" is not making it personal. "You are a heretic" is making it personal. "Catholics worship Mary" is not making it personal. "You worship Mary" is making it personal. "Mormons worship many gods" is not making it personal. "You worship many gods" is making it personal.
"You fool" can fit this pattern. I can imagine "'Presbylutherans are fools' is not making it personal. 'You are a fool' is making it personal."
Another example, a poster may say on an “open” RF thread that a particular belief, diety, religious authority, etc. is "Satanic." But he must not say "You are Satanic." That would be "making it personal." The Bible is always a legitimate source on the Religion Forum, so a poster might quote the Bible where Jesus called Peter "Satan." If a post serves no debate purpose (flame bait or "making it personal" by devious means) - it would be pulled.
The juxtaposition of "The Bible is always a legitimate source" and "by devious means," in my reading, is at least a hint about two things. Biblical quotations in themselves do not count as violations of Religion Forum policy, but a post can use "devious means"--including misusing the scriptures. Recall that the devil himself (see Matthew 4:5-7) is an example of misusing the scriptures. I will venture that "The Bible is always a legitimate source..." does not provide a Bible-quoting post immunity from Religion Forum disciplinary measures when the moderator determines that a violation has occurred in how the quotation is used.
"When in doubt, avoid the use of the pronoun "you" and Freeper's names - or put yourself in the other guy's shoes."
I would suppose that addressing others as "you fool" would be even worse than a simple accusatory (even inflammatory) use of "you."
All in all, I would not recommend that people try it as a form of address--even without the warning in Matthew 5:22. Before anyone uses a similar form of address, those of us who believe that the Bible is inspired would do well to ask ourselves if the same Spirit that inspired Paul inspires us.