Rule 2.2 – Address the issue, topic, or argument, not the person.

[John Bauer]

There has been a recurring misapplication of this rule. The mere act of mentioning another member by name, addressing them personally, or even just referring to them is not a violation of rule 2.2. The rule does not forbid reference; it forbids certain kinds of reference.

The rule itself defines its own scope:

Such things as inflammatory or marginalizing language, divisiveness, misquoting, misrepresenting, trolling, and personal attacks (including belittling, insulting, falsely accusing, or making assumptions about the character, motives, or faith of other members) are strictly prohibited. … Avoid speech that incites needless conflict, fosters resentment, seeks to stir up strife among believers, or exaggerates or distorts another member’s words in order to discredit them or to win an argument. … Aim to promote unity in Christ while allowing for meaningful debate, speaking the truth in love and humility, recognizing that all wisdom and understanding comes from God (cf. Rule 2.1).

This clarifies that the prohibition targets disparaging or adversarial treatment of a person, not the act of addressing or naming them.

Examples of entirely permissible “addressing the person” include:

• thanking or encouraging someone;
  
  ​
• cautioning or advising someone;
  
  ​
• commending, esteeming, or constructively responding to them;
  
  ​
• quoting or referencing them for purposes of discussion.

These all involve “the person,” but they do not fall under the rule’s stated prohibitions. Rule 2.2 governs how we speak of each other (cf. 2.1)—not whether we may speak of each other at all.

Any interpretation that treats a neutral reference to a member’s name as a violation is inconsistent with the language, purpose, and historical application of the rule.