Really? And their excuse isn't going to be any of the useful information shared here, any of the suggestions of violence, it's going to be us calling each other retards and faggots that's going to get them to do what exactly?
Ok so now we're getting away from that facetious argument - rule 1 has always been here - and as a community we came to an understanding of what "respectful" was. When I'm with my friends we call each other all sorts of things that would apparently get me thrown in a gulag, this community was the same way. All sanitizing this place is going to do is make it like anywhere else
Ok, if we're completely dropping the pretense of intelligence agencies coming after us for this and we can admit that was brought up solely to bolster the point despite being inaccurate, I'll bite.
First, context. Second, who cares? Sometimes if my friends are being retarded we will let them know. Getting dangerously close to thought crime here now "what was his intention when he used the word?". Maybe next we can ask how the person it was directed to felt, to really appropriately gauge the impact. Come now, we're not schoolchildren.
as a community we came to an understanding of what "respectful" was
When and where did this happen?
So if I apply a rattled-off string of obscenities, profanities, and pejoratives to you, would you prefer that an impartial person judges the "context" to see whether I just mean them in fun, or would you prefer that they be judged on the words themselves as objectively defined? Or should everyone be free to attack and dehumanize everyone and anyone else and that's just the way it is?
I rather like my compromise that Wild-West speech can be used only in threads tagged NSFW by the OP or the mod. But the rule is there for a reason, and we can't just act like everyone can decide "respect" for themselves.
What possible evidence is there for real concern, what is the consequence, who has seen any of this? You may feel concerned but that doesn't make it a real concern.
Don't conflate "no rules" with "this selected enforcement of rule 1". This again seems like trying to tie in unrelated concerns in attempt to strengthen the point being made here. Also, what do you mean by infighting, and why is that concerning? People should be fighting within this board, that's how the best ideas win. We're not a bloc. Is not calling people mean names going to suddenly make them get along? It seems absurd
Really? And their excuse isn't going to be any of the useful information shared here, any of the suggestions of violence, it's going to be us calling each other retards and faggots that's going to get them to do what exactly?
Ok so now we're getting away from that facetious argument - rule 1 has always been here - and as a community we came to an understanding of what "respectful" was. When I'm with my friends we call each other all sorts of things that would apparently get me thrown in a gulag, this community was the same way. All sanitizing this place is going to do is make it like anywhere else
How does one differentiate retard being used in fun vs in disrespect?
Ok, if we're completely dropping the pretense of intelligence agencies coming after us for this and we can admit that was brought up solely to bolster the point despite being inaccurate, I'll bite.
First, context. Second, who cares? Sometimes if my friends are being retarded we will let them know. Getting dangerously close to thought crime here now "what was his intention when he used the word?". Maybe next we can ask how the person it was directed to felt, to really appropriately gauge the impact. Come now, we're not schoolchildren.
When and where did this happen?
So if I apply a rattled-off string of obscenities, profanities, and pejoratives to you, would you prefer that an impartial person judges the "context" to see whether I just mean them in fun, or would you prefer that they be judged on the words themselves as objectively defined? Or should everyone be free to attack and dehumanize everyone and anyone else and that's just the way it is?
I rather like my compromise that Wild-West speech can be used only in threads tagged NSFW by the OP or the mod. But the rule is there for a reason, and we can't just act like everyone can decide "respect" for themselves.
I would rather be able to respond myself because I'm an adult and don't need an authority figure to handle the fact that someone said mean words to me
It's not pretense, it's real concern.
Without rule 1 the infighting gets ridiculous and without rules some people create chaos.
What possible evidence is there for real concern, what is the consequence, who has seen any of this? You may feel concerned but that doesn't make it a real concern.
Don't conflate "no rules" with "this selected enforcement of rule 1". This again seems like trying to tie in unrelated concerns in attempt to strengthen the point being made here. Also, what do you mean by infighting, and why is that concerning? People should be fighting within this board, that's how the best ideas win. We're not a bloc. Is not calling people mean names going to suddenly make them get along? It seems absurd