Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Politics v7.0 Moderation thread Politics v7.0 Moderation thread

05-24-2017 , 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Lol. Exactly.

Using his own logic 5ive would be the biggest ****ing idiot in this forum.

Which is probably not that far from the truth to be fair.

(reply to mongidig's post)
What's my logic? Be specific.
05-24-2017 , 09:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Ladyboys is unacceptable?
Probably? I mean it doesn't offend me personally but in extreme-PC land I wouldn't expect it to be acceptable.
05-24-2017 , 10:11 PM
I don't think it's an actual slur. I just read the Wikipedia on it and I couldn't tell.

Chez? Can we get a ruling?
05-24-2017 , 11:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
What's my logic? Be specific.
Do I get a prize?
05-25-2017 , 01:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
Probably? I mean it doesn't offend me personally but in extreme-PC land I wouldn't expect it to be acceptable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
I don't think it's an actual slur. I just read the Wikipedia on it and I couldn't tell.

Chez? Can we get a ruling?
wil,

I am a crossdresser considering taking hormones and possibly later doing ffs(for now im just a guy who wears womens clothes) it can be a slur but..its fine. its most insulting if someone is mtf and totally passes and is proud of it.
similairly shemale is a slur but its not a big deal- for a totally different reason its a porn term for people who identify as female.

I dont give a **** if a guy uses either or personally.
05-25-2017 , 01:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Do I get a prize?
yeah the prize of knowing you are intellectually inferior.
05-25-2017 , 03:25 AM
'Ladyboys' is mostly fine in this context as it's referencing a specific group in specifically SE Asia.

Believe me, I hate juan valdez with the burning fire of one thousand suns, so if he ****ed up I'd be the first to say.
05-25-2017 , 04:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Believe me, I hate juan valdez with the burning fire of one thousand suns, so if he ****ed up I'd be the first to say.
Really?

You hate some anonymous person on the internet that much. WOW.

Storing up all that hatred is not good for you man
05-25-2017 , 05:47 AM
spaceman Bryce, do you prefer female pronouns? Do you have a preferred name?

<3
05-25-2017 , 09:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
'Ladyboys' is mostly fine in this context as it's referencing a specific group in specifically SE Asia.

Believe me, I hate juan valdez with the burning fire of one thousand suns, so if he ****ed up I'd be the first to say.
This is what I mean by people on here being overly emotional.

Wow!
05-25-2017 , 09:25 AM
You're basically on here every day crying about something or other, and you're calling other people overly emotional?

Too rich.
05-25-2017 , 10:00 AM
What's the official rationale behind wil's vacation? Not criticizing it, just curious.
05-25-2017 , 11:07 AM
The list of forum sanctions has been updated. You can find them at the bottom of this thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/21...017-a-1646823/
05-25-2017 , 11:10 AM
Hahaha they banned LG too
05-25-2017 , 11:10 AM
Whosnext and chezlaw are Momma's VERY good boys who moderate just the most vibrant discussion place. Lot of learning. Lot of minds being changed. No un-PC stuff AT ALL except literally every ****ing thread. But if you imply that you know someone else's real name, well, both you and the person you're threatening get the banstick. For ****'s sake
05-25-2017 , 11:27 AM
Yeah, um LG never threatened to dox anyone. WTF.
05-25-2017 , 01:59 PM
I mean this:

Quote:
24 May 2017 8:42pm (PDT). 2 day timeout from all forum threads for suggesting he could dox another poster.
is absolutely not what happened.
05-25-2017 , 02:36 PM
What the hell? I just read the new rules and bans. Breitbart is not allowed? Period? Full stop?

I can understand it easily being subject to show proof or don't RE-post a point rule. But what? Full stop? How about Salon? How about the Washington Post? They are certainly biased and prone to some misleading news. I don't have an ax to grind with Breitbart. Really. Stop before you say I support every Breitbart position. I don't read Breitbart, meaning not regularly. Maybe 5 total articles.

I am just concerned about stopping the free flow of ideas.
05-25-2017 , 02:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
How about the Washington Post?
rofl, how about the Wall Street Journal? What newspapers don't you think are equivalent to Breitbart?
05-25-2017 , 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
What the hell? I just read the new rules and bans. Breitbart is not allowed? Period? Full stop?

I can understand it easily being subject to show proof or don't RE-post a point rule. But what? Full stop? How about Salon? How about the Washington Post? They are certainly biased and prone to some misleading news. I don't have an ax to grind with Breitbart. Really. Stop before you say I support every Breitbart position. I don't read Breitbart, meaning not regularly. Maybe 5 total articles.

I am just concerned about stopping the free flow of ideas.
breitbart is a hate site.
05-25-2017 , 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
rofl, how about the Wall Street Journal? What newspapers don't you think are equivalent to Breitbart?
I think they are all biased.
05-25-2017 , 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
What the hell? I just read the new rules and bans. Breitbart is not allowed? Period? Full stop?

I can understand it easily being subject to show proof or don't RE-post a point rule. But what? Full stop? How about Salon? How about the Washington Post? They are certainly biased and prone to some misleading news. I don't have an ax to grind with Breitbart. Really. Stop before you say I support every Breitbart position. I don't read Breitbart, meaning not regularly. Maybe 5 total articles.

I am just concerned about stopping the free flow of ideas.
There was a fairly short time period in which Breitbart articles were not allowed to be linked to. After receiving feedback from a variety of sources, that rule was softened as explained in chezlaw's post on March 23, 2017 (in this thread).

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
Some changes regarding the implementation of the PC rule:

Politically incorrect insults
These are to be avoided. In particular that means no more calling people 'bitches' or '******s'.

Breitbart
Links to Breitbart were banned primarily because the site is not a credible source of news and the site is so at odds with the PC approach of this forum. Give the fact the site is mainstream these days, and the objections raised from posters across the political spectrum, we are going to try out the following compromise. If it causes too many problems then we will reevaluate.

For now, links from Breitbart will be allowed provided:

1) The post containing the link includes a substantive quote of the linked article and forms part of some relevant argument being put forward by the poster.

2) Anything hateful or nonPC is expressly banned - the poster is responsible for both the quote and the content of the links. Posters who flout this rule will be subject to an immediate timeout from the forum.

3) Breitbart links will not be counted as a credible source.
05-25-2017 , 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
Yeah, um LG never threatened to dox anyone. WTF.
Quid pro quo - wanting to appear even handed.

With 8 bans already, wilthetwat is 3 ahead of the field and bookies' red hot favourite to get a perma (will never happen because without him P8.8 is dead).
05-25-2017 , 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
Yeah, um LG never threatened to dox anyone. WTF.
So, going partially down the path of identifying the company is not threatening to dox? Identifying just the financial status of the company is not threatening to dox? What if the country headquarters was added? The region? The city? What if the company size was added? I disagree. It was a thread to dox.
05-25-2017 , 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
So, going partially down the path of identifying the company is not threatening to dox? Identifying just the financial status of the company is not threatening to dox? What if the country headquarters was added? The region? The city? What if the company size was added? I disagree. It was a thread to dox.
LG never identified any company or any kind of personally-identifying information, nor did he threaten to. There was nothing remotely out of line with his posting. Wil lost his **** and made some not-too-subtle threats to dox LG and pester some of his schoolmates.

I really tried to give whosenext the benefit of the doubt, but this is just blatantly dishonest.

      
m