TOS discussion - slurs

[SMR 368]

You realize that language is likely against site rules, right?

I don't think it is. The site rules specifically refer to racist and sexist remarks, of which this is neither.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Yup.

n. Offensive Slang

Used as a disparaging term for a homosexual man.

[Will not]

Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination). For instance, racist or sexist content may be considered hate speech

Nice explanation. However, the epithet is still there. Oh right, it's not me saying that it's ignorant, so the mods aren't going to delete anything.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I don't think it is. The site rules specifically refer to racist and sexist remarks, of which this is neither.

I believe the TOS cites racist and sexist remarks as examples, but offensive comments are not limited to such categories. As Otto states:

[Will not]

Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination). For instance, racist or sexist content may be considered hate speech

The TOS might be amended to state something more like

"Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination), including but not limited to racist or sexist content."

[^_^ 5,021]

It's a shame that the phrase "for instance" isn't clear enough.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It's a shame that the phrase "for instance" isn't clear enough.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

I don't think it is. The site rules specifically refer to racist and sexist remarks, of which this is neither.

What part of "For instance" that precedes the "Racist, sexist" don't you understand? It's not limited to the small group of examples listed.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

What part of "For instance" that precedes the "Racist, sexist" don't you understand? It's not limited to the small group of examples listed.

Intention is everything.

Just because you call people of a demographic a specific word, doesn't mean you are intending to incite a reaction... Could be just what you think,

If it was against the rules, the mods would have it blocked out, along with other words they already do have blocked...

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Intention is everything.

Just because you call people of a demographic a specific word, doesn't mean you are intending to incite a reaction... Could be just what you think,

If it was against the rules, the mods would have it blocked out, along with other words they already do have blocked...

Using a word that is commonly acknowledged to incite a reaction and then claiming I didn't intend to incite a reaction is akin to detonating a bomb in someones house and claiming that you never intended to damage their house.

Maybe the mods haven't blocked it YET because most people are sensitive enough to not use it.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Using a word that is commonly acknowledged to incite a reaction and then claiming I didn't intend to incite a reaction is akin to detonating a bomb in someones house and claiming that you never intended to damage their house.

Maybe the mods haven't blocked it YET because most people are sensitive enough to not use it.

At the end of the day, words are words if you're not using them to attack...

If you're offended by the mere sight/sound of a word, then that's a personal problem really.

As I said, intent is everything.

Bombs do not equal words...

[Boiler 45,050]

Gay was/is a derogatory term.

Where do you stop, where do you start.

Is ####### now OK? I lose track.

[SMR 368]

"For instance" is good enough for me. I realize that this isn't an complete list. All the same, it's safe to say that not all groups are protected. Rapists, for instance, are likely not protected. Similarly, politicians are typically not protected on VisaJourney. Or even political parties. Typically, there have been no complaints about broad verbal assaults on various different broad demographic groups.

Why are homosexuals a protected group? There's nothing in the TOS that explicitly suggests they are.

Certain definitions of demographic group include only races, genders, and ages.

Definition

Edited October 26, 2010 by SMR

[Boiler 45,050]

So because a few groups in your area actually use slurs in their names, it should just be accepted and used? Nice Dannologic™

I thought it was #######, did they change the y to i as they are on Bikes?

Presumably not a slur any longer so no problemo.

[The_Dude 1,142]

"For instance" is good enough for me. I realize that this isn't an complete list. All the same, it's safe to say that not all groups are protected. Rapists, for instance, are likely not protected. Similarly, politicians are typically not protected on VisaJourney. Or even political parties. Typically, there have been no complaints about broad verbal assaults on various different broad demographic groups.

Why are homosexuals a protected group? There's nothing in the TOS that explicitly suggests they are.

Wrong.

[Danno 1,228]

So because a few groups in your area actually use slurs in their names, it should just be accepted and used? Nice Dannologic™

It;s more than a "few groups in my area".

There are many national groups which use the same type of group names, such as "####### Nation".

[The_Dude 1,142]

It;s more than a "few groups in my area".

There are many national groups which use the same type of group names, such as "####### Nation".

That doesn't devalue the negative connotation associated with the word danno. Gay groups using it is much like black groups owning the N word. They use it, so YOU can't hurt them by using it. It doesn't make it acceptable in society.