# Clarification of rule against hate speech

**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-rule-against-hate-speech/964634
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [May 18, 2022, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-rule-against-hate-speech/964634 "2022-05-18T19:43:13Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 48

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)
#### Post date: [May 19, 2022, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-rule-against-hate-speech/964634/48 "2022-05-19T06:06:54Z")

</div>

> [@EinsteinsHund](#):
>
> So until this post, someone making potshots at white people wouldn’t have been modded?

I’ve been modded for this, when not using any slurs.

> [@Sunny\_Daze](#):
>
> I will take it further than **Max** and say that the way this reads to me is that racism is allowable so long as it is civilized.

That’s how I read it, too. For instance, this would make scientific racism debates allowable again:

> [@Ed\_Zotti](#):
>
> Criticism of minorities on factual grounds is not considered hate speech and is not a violation of SMDB rules, provided it is clearly framed as a debatable proposition.

> [@BigT](#):
>
> This slight change to the status quo does not seem to address this concern at all.

My feeling exactly.

> [@Grrr](#):
>
> I think intelligent people should be able to debate things the pushes our comfort zones and questions our sensibilities.

_Debating_ the inferiority of me and mine is a nice privilege to have, I’m sure.

> [@Ed\_Zotti](#):
>
> We have always modded hate speech

I can point to at least one Mod who explicitly, openly did not. This is a nice myth, but no, you have not always modded it. And that leaves open the question of what does constitute hate speech.

> [@Ed\_Zotti](#):
>
> The SDMB community has shown itself to be well equipped to identify defective logic, inadequate evidence, unfounded assumptions, and so on

But has shown itself to be _very_ bad at identifying what’s racist. FFS, I once had to point out that a username contained a racist slur. And I got a _mound_ of uphill for it.

> [@Ed\_Zotti](#):
>
> If you see what you consider to be racist speech on this board and you believe our response is inadequate, by all means point it out.

The response to Cartooniverse’s racist speech was inadequate. This has _already_ been pointed out. What is the response going to be?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-rule-against-hate-speech/964634)._