In the thread that spawned this one, I quoted the following thread/rule:
To which, EZ says two sequences that seem to be in conflict with each other. First, which almost exactly echoes the closing line of the prior thread.
- Not all pejorative comments about minorities rise to the level of hate speech or, in our judgment, are clearly racist. We recognize there are differences of opinion on what constitutes racist speech. We leave it to the SDMB community to debate such questions. If you believe a post is racist, you are free to say so, provided you abide by our rule against insults – see point #6 below. Others are free to disagree with you. The belief that the truth will emerge from the clash of views in open debate is a cardinal principle of this board.
But almost immediately after:
No slurs or racist cheap shots. Do not post slurs or other cheap shots against minorities, including but not limited to groups characterized by race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or gender orientation. Example: In a discussion of Henry Ford ordering his engineers to examine a foreign aircraft so they could copy it, poster A commented, “What the h*ll–did Ford think he was Chinese or something?” This gratuitous remark in a thread having nothing to do with China plays to the stereotype that Chinese people as a class are ripoff artists. This is a racist cheap shot. Remarks of this type will be modded.
The last of the three terms from the prior thread IMOH felt it would very clearly run afoul of the latter point. And this was not addressed by EZ or any mod. I can understand intellectually at least the desire to avoid bright lines, but this and other dehumanizing language is being ignored despite the existing guidelines.
Certainly, interpretation -may- play a part of this, and we love to be rules lawyers here. But I don’t think an honest, good-faith interpretation of the language used especially in a modern context leads to any other interpretation.