Maybe so, but that’s not permitted in GQ. If you want to do it, go to the Pit.
Sorry, “idiots” is not offensive in the same way that “fags” is.
Irrelevant.
Irrelevant.
Yes.
I’ve enforced this rule many times before.
I have friends and relatives who are homosexual. I can guarantee that they are not particular happy seeing the term used in the disparaging fashion you used it.
Yes you would. Are you arguing that your intent is not to disparage people at Apple by comparing them with homosexuals? You are disparaging both people at Apple, and homosexuals by using them as an insulting comparison.
If you had posted that in GQ, and I had seen it, I would have definitely issued you a warning rather than a note. Could you please link to the post? I’ll be happy to issue you a retroactive warning if that was posted anywhere outside the Pit.
As I said, because I recognized it was intended as a joke I made it a mod note rather than an official warning. But it was derogatory; and derogatory remarks are not permitted in GQ, even as jokes.
Bullshit. FFS, you didn’t even quote the rules for GQ about this, you fucking quoted the Registration Agreement.
I notice now that the poster who DID quote GQ rule #2 left out a part of it, which I’ve helpfully bolded below:
But you won’t even tolerate a joke that you understood was a joke.
I’ll drop this, as I can see you’ve dug yourself into a trench about it. But for the record, I think your stance is arbitrary and capricious, and your attempt to use the Registration Agreement in place of the actual GQ rules is deceptive and, frankly, fucked up IMO.
I’ve shown that the Registration Agreement isn’t enforced, that there is a forum on the board set up specifically for people to do what the RA says they cannot do, and that you can’t support your own contention that anything I said was an insult to anyone rather than a joke.
Hell, if you were personally offended, why didn’t you just Pit me over it? No, you chose to throw your mod weight around, on the basis that
But they didn’t see this, did they? So you sought to smack me down in case one of them saw it, is that it?
That’s bullshit. Arbitrary, capricious bullshit.
And while we’re talking about bullshit, when is the Dope gonna get around to actually enforcing that part of the Registration Agreement you quoted? Or is the position of the Straight Dope that y’all reserve the right to selectively and arbitrarily enforce the rules, as I said in the OP.
So far, all you’ve done is show that to be true.
LAST NOTE: Sorry about mis-spelling your name. It was unintentional. How did I have it spelled?
I do want to add that I have not seen this sort of thing accepted in GQ. This whole “different forums are moderated differently” thing always trips me up. It’s explicit with the Pit, but less so in other fora.
I think where I’ve seen it most is in Cafe Society, in threads already about a cultural work. I guess there’s a greater assumption that people will understand that it’s just a quote.
The Registration is the most basic set of rules that the board has. I’m surprised you do not know this; you must have agreed to the Registration Agreement in order to join.
The issue of course is not that it was a joke, but that you used a derogatory term to make a joke.
As I’ve pointed out, the Registration Agreement applies to GQ. This should be obvious.
I fail to see that because we allow insults and derogatory remarks in the Pit, we are compelled to allow them in every other forum. You’re really arguing here that we should shut down the Pit.
I was not personally offended, since I am heterosexual. However, I am committed to preventing slurs against other members of the board regardless of my own sexual orientation. In any case, moderators are not permitted to Pit posters; and even if I were, I wouldn’t have gone to the trouble since as I noted my only intent was to remind you of the Rules. I’m not particularly outraged.
I am obligated to, as you put it, “throw my mod weight around” when someone violates the rules. And I would have enforced this rule even if I didn’t personally know any homosexuals.
Irrelevant. It’s still offensive, whether or not any member of the offended class happens to see.
Not capricious at all, since the offense is included in the official rules.
I acknowledge that we allow much more leeway in the Pit. Whether or not we should abolish the Pit is another argument. But because we allow insults in the Pit, doesn’t mean we are going to allow posters to make offensive and derogatory remarks elsewhere on the board.
If the you’re going to follow your own rules, them follow them. To follow them some of the time, and not at others, is, again, arbitrary and capricious.
Cafe Society should also be shut down, as people are frequently disparaging of professional & creative works and the people who make them.
IMHO should also be shut down, as sometimes people express derogatory opinions.
In fact, this forum, About This Message Board, should be shut down, since it’s for complaints, and by their very nature, complaints are derogatory.
Also, you don’t find “idiot” to be “as offensive” as the term I used… but the rules say nothing about degrees of derogatory. So you arbitrarily decided which was MORE derogatory.
In any case, when can I expect the SDMB to adhere to it’s own rules, and stop allowing people to post things that are contrary to the Registration Agreement, especially in The BBQ Pit?
Fair enough. Go ahead and argue that. But there is no question that the mod note you received in GQ was justified according to the Registration Agreement.
After 5 years here, you just suddenly noticed that the Pit exists? Or are you just arguing against it because you received a mod note?
C’mon Bo, Give it up. GQ is the crux of the buisquit here at the SDMB. take the semantics and cram it up the proper forum. You’re wrong and that’s a fact.
No, you’ve got it all wrong. It’s not that you allow them in the Pit, it’s that they are allowed in every forum, already. You quoted the Registration Agreement to me, and when I showed you, as I will again, that the damn thing is never enforced, then you switch your argument to being about the GQ rules.
So is this post in the same thread, where I malign Emerson and one of their products.
How about this MPSIMS thread, where a woman is referred to over and over again with such terms as “crazy bitch”, “asshole”, “sociopath” and several posters cheer on a group that they expect to begin harassing her, even going so far as to say “I hope she gets everything that’s coming to her”? Comments like this:
The Dope doesn’t have to allow these comments to stand, but it does, in direct violation of it’s own rules. And it’s ridiculous.
Colibri has even moved the goalpost from “derogatory” to “offensive” to some nebulous level of offensive.
But I wasn’t saying it was offensive, I was pointing out that it’s derogatory, which it is. Your initial complaint about my use of the term “fag” was that it was derogatory:
Only after I pointed out that disparaging comments are made all the time in pretty much every forum on the Dope did the issue become one of being “offensive”, even tho no one, not even Colibri was offended:
I mean, do you have a list or a scale of “offensive” that I can refer to next time I post in GQ?
The whole thing is ridiculous, and neither Colibri nor the rest of the SDMB is showing any consistency at all in enforcing the rules, instead choosing to invoke degrees of offensive (when the issue was really about a comment being disparaging), or to ignore the transgressions altogether.
If it makes you feel any better, I’ll admit that I was wrong in the OP: there is in fact such a rule. It’s just a rule that, in every forum, isn’t ever enforced. And based on that, based on my many years of posting here (which you keep bringing up) and my experiences of seeing similar comments (and even this exact movie line) posted with no admonitions, I posted this comment in GQ just as I would have in any other forum, expecting it to be perfectly okay. Past practice, you know.
Eight words. That’s what you could and should have said right in that thread, instead of the thousands of poor, defenseless words slain in the pursuit of this folly.
How is this entire thread not in violation of the Registration Agreement?
Is Christine O’Donnell an Imbecile Who Doesn’t Know the First Amendment?
…or just an imbecile?
The whole point of the thread is to disparage Ms. O’Donnell, and to insult her, behaviours which, Colibri pointed out, are not permitted. Will this thread be shut down? Or will someone contend that “imbecile” isn’t an insulting term? Or maybe it falls on the scale below the level of offense? Where is that scale we can reference, again?
Please, mods, enforce the Board rules as written, or change them.
You were in GQ. You made a joke that wan’t funny. The mod reminded you that you were in GQ and asked you not to make offensive jokes there. You didn’t get a warning, just a request that you not make an offensive jokes in GQ.
Nothing going on elsewhere on the boards is relevant to this.
It is true that insults are allowed in all forums, as long as they are not insults against posters. But using a disparaging term is not allowed. You used a disparaging term. End of story.
As others have noted, GQ has stricter standards than other forums on this board. Given that a note was issued and not a warning, I don’t have a problem with the ruling.
Then Colibri should not have quoted the Registration Agreement to me; she should have restricted herself to quoting and enforcing the GQ rules.
But she didn’t, and so now I want to know when the rest of the SDMB will be conforming to it’s own posted rules.
Because the truth is, if you have rules posted and only choose to enforce some of them some of the time, the entire legal contract between posters and the SDMB could be void. AFAIK, legally, the SDMB opens itself up to lawsuits based on the fact that certain slights and disparaging remarks have a blind eye turned to them.
Not end of story. And you got the rule wrong. The RA doesn’t say “against other posters”.
Colibri enforces the rule based on some sliding scale of offensiveness.
Note that there is no denial that term “idiot” is offensive, it’s just not the “the same” kind of offensive.
So clearly, use of some disparaging terms is allowed.
And without a list or something to let me know which types of terms are offensive enough to warrant admonition, the enforcement of the rule becomes, again, arbitrary and capricious.
Again, mods, please enforce the rules all the time, or change the rules.
I think I’ve made the basis for the moderator note clear to everyone but the OP, and I don’t think there is much chance at this point that providing any further explanation to him will do any good.
To sum up:
The Registration Agreement applies across all forums. It is the basic set of rules for the board.
We have a more detailed enumeration of the rules in ATMB, plus specific rules for each forum. The general rule for insults and hate speech is the following:
We don’t have a specific rule against insults or hate speech in the GQ rules because it is already covered by the Registration Agreement and the general board rules. Hate speech is prohibited in all forums, including the BBQ Pit.
My note was not for insults, but for using a derogatory term for homosexuals. “Fag,” like “nigger,” “kike,” “spic,” etc., is the kind of term that potentially qualifies as hate speech. The word was used in a derogatory fashion, in order to denigrate people who work at non-Apple companies by comparing them to homosexuals; the fact that it was a quote from a movie is irrelevant. (This is would also be prohibited by the GQ rule against professional jabs.) These kinds of words used in a derogatory sense are not allowed in GQ or in other non-Pit forums. (These words could, however, be used in the context of a discussion of word origins, their use in literature or song lyrics, debates on their degree of offensiveness in GD, etc.)
The rules are enforced according to the best judgement of the moderators. I have consistently issued mod notes or warnings for the use of derogatory terms of the same degree of offensiveness as “fag” in GQ; if I haven’t, it’s because I haven’t seen them. In this case, although the use of the term could merit an official warning, because it was intended as a joke I made the judgement call to issue a mod note instead.
PS. I’m a “he,” by the way.