This thread brought to you by the letter 'F'

Okay, I think I'm caught up.

 

^ ^

 

I edit it as I see it.

 

yodahs-daddy posted on 4/12/05 6:41pm

---

[i]I just think it's stupid we can't say WT#, but there's threads filled with people talking about condoms, penis', vaginas, breasts, hymens, pics with nearly nude women, drug use, alcohol use, etc around. [/i]

I totally agree, what is family friendly about any of that? I mean I wouldn't want my kids reading or learning anything from that, I really don't think discussion of how a condom fits is appropiate for a PG rated board, would you see that in a PG rated film?
[hr][/blockquote]

It's this ridiculous inconsistent moderation that frustrates me. If you're going to be allowing threads like "Do you masturbate?" or "What's your favorite condom?", there's no point in keeping up this "family friendly" facade.

 

That thread will be allowed as long as it's kept clean. Once it crosses the line, it'll be locked.

 

rhysklaus posted on 4/13/05 1:58pm

---

That thread will be allowed as long as it's kept clean. Once it crosses the line, it'll be locked.
[hr][/blockquote]

How can you keep a thread about masturbation clean? I don't get it.

 

Life is contradictory and never 100% consistent. We've got some rules, several I don't agree with. But it's not my call. What my responsibility is is to moderate to those rules as best I can and count on the community to inform me of things I miss.

 

my understanding was that you couldn't even say 'wt*' because it was obvious that the * stood for an 'f' and that it had to be edited to 'wth'

or is that incorrect?

ETA: In this thread it's stated the 'wt*' is actually incorrect because then * = F = pointless

And Sape, you stated Say whatever suits your fancy in the real world outside of these forums. While in these forums, however, please don't use the words or imply them. That's what we're asking. Thanks., as a response to whether wt* can be used, and it was decided that it couldn't be used, because the * implied F.

So are we changing the rule now so that wt* is okay? Or does wt(letter) AND wt(star) BOTH have to be edited to 'wth'

 

Along with retarded, can we please ban bastard, crazy, lunatic, loony and mad?

 

Don't forget "dumb". I think that could be found offensive, and someone's gotta speak up for the dumb people.

 

Don't forget "dumb". I think that could be found offensive, and someone's gotta speak up for the dumb people.

Hey, precedence says that calling someone dumb is a permban.

 

Personally, if you're going to ban the full thing, you might as well ban "wt*" as well, since it's blatantly obvious and defeats the puprose of banning it to begin with. (For example, you have to put **** instead of a letter and three stars.)

 

Incidently, I have it on good authority the ACLU is suing on F's behalf on charges of discrimination, so you might want to contact your lawyers.

 

"It breaks my heart."

In that case, we better get rid of "heartbroken" too.

 

Personally, I think the word "Sith" really needs to go. It just gives off such an evil and dark feeling...

 

And Wars. I can't abide that negative conotation. And revenge.

But we must not forget why we're all here. It's because we love Star ****. On May 19th, Star ****: ******* of the **** comes out, and provided it isn't ****, *** or ********, it should unite us all. WT* am I thinking??? Of course ******* of the **** won't be ****, *** or ********!

 

Possible solution. Instead of WT*

Use WT[H].

 

You people do know that the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, right? Not proof for an argument?

The owners and administration can ban the word "right" tomorrow, but there is nothing compelling them to then ban the word "wrong" or "left". You seem to be under the impression that just because one word is banned all others must be too. That's just not the case. Complain about hypocrisy or unfairness all you want, but no one is keeping you here.

 

Did the owners ban retarded?

 

You have to ask them, but since DarthSapient is their chosen representative and the person they placed in charge of day-to-day board operations, I would guess you'd do well to ask him. I'm positive that they trust him to form and enact policy when it comes to something as petty as various ways of making sure people feel bad about themselves.

 

If you're going to ban one word for being offensive to a small handful of people, you should ban all words that are offensive to a small handful of people.

Otherwise, it seems like a [word no longer allowed] double standard or pointless rule.

Yes, the owners and administration can do what they want. I don't think anyone is arguing that. People are arguing the lack of logic behind the recent [word no longer allowed] decisions. If [word] is banned, why not ban other words that are EQUALLY OFFENSIVE to just as many people?

 

You people do know that the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, right? Not proof for an argument?

AAaaaand, this thread has become the 'retarded' thread.

My God, why do people think that saying 'slippery slope' proves anything?